GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (
|
visual edit |
history) ·
Article talk (
|
history) ·
Watch
Reviewer: Vacant0 ( talk · contribs) 17:50, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
Hi! I saw this article on the GAN backlog. I will start the review a bit later. Cheers, -- Vacant0 ( talk) 17:50, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
Good Article review progress box
|
Early life and rise" section. The rest of the lede is alright.
Despotat of Serbia" in the second sentence in the "
Struggle for family inheritance" section is a typo? Is it meant to be Despot of Serbia or the Despotate?
Of major Bosnian nobility, the first to act was Radislav Pavlović, while the Vojsalićs and Radivojevićs attacked in the Lower Neretva valley with success." → The first one to act from major Bosnian nobilities was Radislav Pavlović, while the Vojisalićs and Radivojevićs attacked in the Lower Neretva valley with success.
Incursion into Zeta" and "
Citizenship of Dubrovnik" sections both have two sentences and are short, my recommendation would be to merge them.
According to sources, approximately 2000 (some cite up to 12,000[9]) were converted to Catholicism, as reported by the apostolic legate, Nikola Modruški, who resided in Bosnia between 1461 and 1463" with "
Manichean heretics were baptized forcefully".
Stjepan acted, and with the support of Venice, prepared to attack." → Stjepan acted, and with the support of Venice he was prepared to attack.
Land possession" section a sub-heading and move it near an appropriate section.
Historiography, personality a legacy" can be shortened to just "
Legacy".
In 1964, Ćirković published his historical biography, Herceg Stefan Vukčić-Kosača i njegovo doba , using his predecessors, and in particular the specific research of Ilarion Ruvarac, Jakov Lukarević, Lajos Thallóczy, Aleksa Ivić, Mihajlo Dinić, and Vladimir Ćorović." between doba and using.
Remaining days, death and succession" section, next to the "
He was succeeded as herceg by his second and younger son, Vlatko Hercegović, who struggled to retain as much of the territory as he could." sentence per MOS:INFOBOXREF. This also includes the Vego 1982 source.
Historians also speak of one other consequence of Stjepan's acquiring the title of herzog, which is that it gave the name to an entire province and represents one of his enduring legacies (See Legacy)." is unsourced.
Legacy" section.
@ Santasa99: I'm pretty sure that you can fix these issues, I'll put the article on the hold until you do it. Besides this, the article is well-written and it meets most of the GA criteria. Cheers, -- Vacant0 ( talk) 22:40, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
Comment: Most of the article is based on a 1964 source. I'm not saying this should prevent the article from acquiring GA status but it is somewhat bothersome. The Historiography section and the Legacy in particular also seem to reflect mostly a 1960s view although much more recent scholarship exists [1]. Plinul cel tanar ( talk) 08:05, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
I don't have a specific problem with the 1964 source or with the article per se. I might even say I find the article of much better quality than other GA dealing with Eastern Europe or the Balkans in the Middle Ages. However, as a general rule, relying in disproportionate manner on a single, 80 year old source, in a history article, is not a very good sign. In the particular case of the Legacy or Historiography sections the focus is on the way in which academic and popular views of a historical character shift in time. And shift they do, particularly in former Yugoslav republics. Please don't take my remarks the wrong way. I am trying to be constructive and suggest improvements in the event of a future FA nomination. Plinul cel tanar ( talk) 08:19, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (
|
visual edit |
history) ·
Article talk (
|
history) ·
Watch
Reviewer: Vacant0 ( talk · contribs) 17:50, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
Hi! I saw this article on the GAN backlog. I will start the review a bit later. Cheers, -- Vacant0 ( talk) 17:50, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
Good Article review progress box
|
Early life and rise" section. The rest of the lede is alright.
Despotat of Serbia" in the second sentence in the "
Struggle for family inheritance" section is a typo? Is it meant to be Despot of Serbia or the Despotate?
Of major Bosnian nobility, the first to act was Radislav Pavlović, while the Vojsalićs and Radivojevićs attacked in the Lower Neretva valley with success." → The first one to act from major Bosnian nobilities was Radislav Pavlović, while the Vojisalićs and Radivojevićs attacked in the Lower Neretva valley with success.
Incursion into Zeta" and "
Citizenship of Dubrovnik" sections both have two sentences and are short, my recommendation would be to merge them.
According to sources, approximately 2000 (some cite up to 12,000[9]) were converted to Catholicism, as reported by the apostolic legate, Nikola Modruški, who resided in Bosnia between 1461 and 1463" with "
Manichean heretics were baptized forcefully".
Stjepan acted, and with the support of Venice, prepared to attack." → Stjepan acted, and with the support of Venice he was prepared to attack.
Land possession" section a sub-heading and move it near an appropriate section.
Historiography, personality a legacy" can be shortened to just "
Legacy".
In 1964, Ćirković published his historical biography, Herceg Stefan Vukčić-Kosača i njegovo doba , using his predecessors, and in particular the specific research of Ilarion Ruvarac, Jakov Lukarević, Lajos Thallóczy, Aleksa Ivić, Mihajlo Dinić, and Vladimir Ćorović." between doba and using.
Remaining days, death and succession" section, next to the "
He was succeeded as herceg by his second and younger son, Vlatko Hercegović, who struggled to retain as much of the territory as he could." sentence per MOS:INFOBOXREF. This also includes the Vego 1982 source.
Historians also speak of one other consequence of Stjepan's acquiring the title of herzog, which is that it gave the name to an entire province and represents one of his enduring legacies (See Legacy)." is unsourced.
Legacy" section.
@ Santasa99: I'm pretty sure that you can fix these issues, I'll put the article on the hold until you do it. Besides this, the article is well-written and it meets most of the GA criteria. Cheers, -- Vacant0 ( talk) 22:40, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
Comment: Most of the article is based on a 1964 source. I'm not saying this should prevent the article from acquiring GA status but it is somewhat bothersome. The Historiography section and the Legacy in particular also seem to reflect mostly a 1960s view although much more recent scholarship exists [1]. Plinul cel tanar ( talk) 08:05, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
I don't have a specific problem with the 1964 source or with the article per se. I might even say I find the article of much better quality than other GA dealing with Eastern Europe or the Balkans in the Middle Ages. However, as a general rule, relying in disproportionate manner on a single, 80 year old source, in a history article, is not a very good sign. In the particular case of the Legacy or Historiography sections the focus is on the way in which academic and popular views of a historical character shift in time. And shift they do, particularly in former Yugoslav republics. Please don't take my remarks the wrong way. I am trying to be constructive and suggest improvements in the event of a future FA nomination. Plinul cel tanar ( talk) 08:19, 6 January 2022 (UTC)