Talk:1724 papal conclave/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Display name 99 (talk · contribs) 00:46, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

I am beginning the review now.

Background

• I'm not sure that all the information on Innocent is necessary for our purposes here. If it is, the section needs to be expanded (particularly in regards to the change in the Spanish dynasty-what specific influence did that have?) to show how it is relevant to the 1724 conclave that elected Benedict XIII.
  • Needed because the Jedin and Dolan (1981) comment on how the 1724 conclave was virtually identical in terms of factional alignment of the 1721 conclave. Having it as background is neccesary to avoid synthesis, because they only make the comments about the 1721 conclave and don't feel the need to expand on it since they were virtually identical/on the same page of a 578 page book. I've expanded a bit on the dynasties and how the impacted that election and noted that Innocent XIII only appointed three cardinals. This should connect the 1724 conclave to the politics of the 1721 conclave more clearly and explain how the secular politics impacted the College. TonyBallioni (talk) 01:44, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

It looks better now. Display name 99 (talk) 02:48, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

Conclave

• This section needs to be developed more. Why did the zelanti faction want Imperiali elected? Why did Charles VI veto the other guy?
  • Expanded on veto of Paolucci. Pastor does not comment on the exact reasons for the zelanti preferring Imperiali. He probably presumed that the reader would know what the word meant and its implications. There is a Wikilink to our article of the zelanti which should help explain it to the reader and allow them to draw their conclusions without getting into critical commentary not supported by sourcing. TonyBallioni (talk) 02:51, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

OK, but why were the Bourbons and Charles VI in conflict? Display name 99 (talk) 14:06, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

I've updated the conclave section to spell out that Charles VI was a Hapsburg. I also updated the background to make it clear to the reader that the War of the Spanish Succession was fought over a Bourbon ascending to a Hapsburg throne. I think this is a good way of spelling out the secular politics at play in the conclave while having the conclave section focus on the process of the election. TonyBallioni (talk) 14:42, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

Election of Benedict XIII

• The lead is supposed to be a summary of the article's body. Therefore, the fact that Orsini had to be persuaded by the head of the Order of Preachers should be mentioned, and in greater detail, in this section. Display name 99 (talk) 00:46, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Moved OP mention to body paragraph as sourcing doesn't go in depth so it would be inappropriate for lede. I've expanded more onto Orisini's actions before his election. None of the sources comment as to his motivations for resisting, though Pastor does use it to paint him as humble after the fact. Hopefully this gives a clearer picture of his actions without going into unsourced commentary. TonyBallioni (talk) 04:35, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

This looks very good, but can you mention the name of the head of the OP? Display name 99 (talk) 14:06, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

 Done TonyBallioni (talk) 14:42, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

Excellent work. The article has been promoted. Display name 99 (talk) 15:10, 26 May 2017 (UTC)