Talk:Tiepolo conspiracy/GA1

GA Review

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

Nominator: Cplakidas (talk · contribs) 17:54, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: Borsoka (talk · contribs) 03:52, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Is it well written?
A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:

B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
Is it verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check?
A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:

B. Reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose):

C. It contains no original research:

D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:
Is it broad in its coverage?
A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:

B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
Is it neutral?
It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
Is it stable?
It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:

B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
Overall:
Pass or Fail:

Comments

...nobles and magnates... What is the difference? A link to Venetian nobility?
...which generally controlled politics Why generally?
I would shortly (in a sentence) introduce the office of doge and the procedure of election before Tiepolo's election is mentioned.
...to limit the Doge's power through the six ducal councillors... An explanation with two or three words? ("...through strengthening the authority of the six ducal councillors/through granting a veto right to the six ducal councillors/...)
...over the salt monopoly... Whose?
...with Charles, Count of Valois to launch a crusade for the reconquest of Constantinople and the re-establishment of the Latin Empire... I would rephrase to be more informative: "...with Charles of Valois, the claimant to the defunct Latin Empire of Constantinople, to launch a crusade against the Byzantines who had reconquered Constantinople, previously an important center of Venetian commerce...", or something similar.
At the same time, Venice was embroiled in conflict....At the same time, Gradenigo presided over a major reform... Rephrase.
The settlement of the Serrata... Delete "settlement of the".
Delete "or Bocho".
At least one later source however claims that the Boccono's followers were unhappy at the election of Gradenigo as Doge rather than Giacomo Tiepolo, the commoners' preferred candidate. Is this necessary?
Link Dujam II Frankopan to Count Doimo of Veglia.
...prohibited the Dalmatian nobles from holding seats... We are not informed that Doimo of Veglia is a Dalmatian noble.
...the younger Tiepolo... Is the adjective necessary?
Introduce the Scuola Grande della Carità when it is first mentioned, and delete the introduction at it second mention.
...what befell the Querini column... Why not past perfect?
Section "Attempted coup" refers to incidents indicating that commoners supported the government against Tiepolo whereas previous section presents him as a politicians supported by the commoners. Could you solve this contradiction?
That the painters' guild fought against Tiepolo is only mentioned in section "Aftermath".
The title of Gullino's book (listed in section "Further reading") indicates that there are historians who regard the conspiracy as an attempt by aristocrats from the Terraferma to conquer Venice. I miss this interpretation from the article. Borsoka (talk) 05:18, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

File:Vecia del Morter.jpg: I am not sure that its publication is fully in line with the special Italian copyright laws, but I am not an expert of the issue. Could you clarify it? Borsoka (talk) 05:34, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Source review

Why is Hazlitt (1915) still regarded a reliable source?
Romano (2024): location is missing. Borsoka (talk) 05:50, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]