Jump to content

Talk:Byzantine–Venetian treaty of 1268/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review

[edit]
RESULT
Promoted to GA

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

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

Reviewer: Spinningspark (talk · contribs) 17:48, 16 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Looking... SpinningSpark 17:48, 16 March 2019 (UTC) Review follows. You may respond below each item if you wish, but please do not add tick marks or[reply]

other graphic symbols, and do not strike through completed items.

Lead
  • It is unclear in the lead why the rise of Charles of Anjou was significant. There is no harm in expanding the lead slightly on this, especially given that WP:LEAD asks for four paragraphs as a rule of thumb.
  • Good point. I've expanded the lede quite a bit to cover the background of the events since 1261.
Byzantine–Genoese–Venetian relations...
  • "As a result..." is an odd way to start the first sentence of a new subsection. Readers will be wondering "as a result of what?" I'm thinking that phrase can just be removed without changing any meaning.
  • Done.
Aftermath
  • "...500 Venetians seized in Negroponte..." Please expand. Did this happen before or after the treaty coming into force? If before, why were they not returned earlier? If after, was this some kind of treaty breach?
  • This refers to article 7 of the 1265 treaty and article 1 of the 1268 treaty; the city of Negroponte was a Venetian colony, but in a sort of condominium with the Lombard lords of Euboea (also referred to as Negroponte). Licario attacked the Lombard lords, and the Venetians of Negroponte, on their own initiative, despite the treaty of Venice with Palaiologos. I've rephrased to clear some of the confusion.
  • "...and in 1272 renewed his alliance with Genoa..." The text does not say who is being referred to here.
  • Fixed.
  • "The terms posed by the Popes..." Why is the plural used here?
  • Typo error, fixed.
  • "Angevin". Can we wikilink this please. (Is Capetian House of Anjou the right link?) It is not obvious if you don't already know that Angevin is the adjectival form of Anjou.
  • Fixed.
Images
  • Fixed.
SpinningSpark 09:39, 17 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Spinningspark, thanks a lot for taking the to review this. Anything else? How did the article read? I know it is a complicated issue with multiple actors, so I am always worried about comprehensibility for the average reader. If you have any suggestions above and beyond GA criteria, feel free to add them here. Constantine ✍ 09:29, 25 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Please take another look at the first point in "Aftermath". SpinningSpark 16:51, 27 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Byzantine–Venetian_treaty_of_1268/GA1&oldid=891072378"