Talk:Cardinal protector of England

Cardinal protector of England has been listed as one of the Philosophy and religion good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
March 12, 2012	Good article nominee	Listed

A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on August 2, 2009.

The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that Lorenzo Campeggio, the cardinal protector of England during the English Reformation, determined that Henry VIII's marriage could not be annulled?

Catholicism Mid‑importance

Cardinal protector of England is within the scope of WikiProject Catholicism, an attempt to better organize and improve the quality of information in articles related to the Catholic Church. For more information, visit the project page.CatholicismWikipedia:WikiProject CatholicismTemplate:WikiProject CatholicismCatholicism articles

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Catholicism task list:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : see Draft articles
Assess : see Category:Unassessed Catholicism articles; Category:Unknown-importance Catholicism articles
Cleanup : Blessed Virgin Mary (see the talk page)
Collaborate : Invitation template needed, see Category:WikiProject invitation templates
Copyedit : Cuthbert Tunstall
Expand : Angelus; Roman Catholicism in Kosovo; Bishop Adolph John Paschang; Cum sæpe accidere; Altar Society; American Board of Catholic Missions; Bernard Häring
NPOV : Americanism (heresy); Ensoulment
Photo : see Category:Wikipedia requested photographs of Catholicism
Stubs : see Category:Stub-Class Catholicism articles; Category:Catholic Church stubs
Update : Peer review; John Aloysius Maguire
Verify : Archdiocese of Glasgow; Archbishop of Westminster; Bishop; Saint Mungo; Sanctification; Westminster Cathedral
Other : Watch recent changes for Catholicism articles

England Mid‑importance

	England portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of England on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EnglandWikipedia:WikiProject EnglandTemplate:WikiProject EnglandEngland-related articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Comments

My reservations about this article is that almost all of it comes from one source. Is there a reason for that, as it seems like it is a summary of one publication? Regards, MathewTownsend (talk) 03:59, 24 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Most of my articles are about obscure topics. This one is doubly obscure. I included other sources where I found they had something to say. I did not find much else. I may have missed a few sources that devote only a sentence or two to this topic; I do not think I missed anything with an extended discussion. If you can point me to sources with the latter, I will include them. Savidan 04:14, 24 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No, I can't. The intrigue of the article for me is that I know nothing about it and it would be fascinating to learn. You do write on interesting topics! MathewTownsend (talk) 04:31, 24 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Cardinal protector of England/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Cerebellum (talk · contribs) 19:32, 12 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I will be reviewing this article. --Cerebellum (talk) 19:32, 12 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Prose

The prose is excellent, here are few minor quibbles:

Lead: Although earlier cardinals had filled similar roles, "the existence of national protectorships was first openly and regularly recognized only" by Pope Julius II.. This seems like an unremarkable statement that doesn't need to be quoted. The way it is written, it seems odd that the quoted portion ends right before the end of the sentence.
Lead: according to Wilkie. This should specify who Wilkie is.
Prose: refusal of the pope to create John Morton, the archbishop of Canterbury, a cardinal. Is it common usage to talk about "creating someone a cardinal"? To my ears, "appoint" or "make" sounds more natural.
Prose: della Rovere's selection was likely arranged. Should della be capitalized here?
Prose: single, bumbling amateur. I think this means that Fisher was the only amateur diplomat, but the way it is written is a little confusing.
Aldiosi: The spelling of Aldiosi/Adiosi's name should be made consistent.

Broadness of coverage

This is very good in general, but you might consider adding a "background" section at the beginning of the article to explain what the situation was vis a vis England and the Catholic Church at the time, what there was before there were cardinal protectors, and expound on exactly what cardinal protectors were supposed to do. A lot of this contextual information is in the lead already, but in general things in the lead should be mentioned in the body also. If you move some of the material in the lead to a new background section, you will have more room to briefly summarize the "History" and "Attempts at reconciliation" sections in the lead, since currently they are missing.

References

I agree with MathewTownsend from the talk page that it would be better if the referencing was more diverse, but of course Wikipedia is limited by what sources are available and there is nothing in the GA criteria prohibiting reliance on a single source. Other than that, you do an exemplary job of citing everything that needs to be cited,

Can you correct the formatting for footnote #6? It should ideally be that same as for the other sources cited.
For footnote #61, could you please specify what book was reviewed?
The bibliographical information for footnote #66 is incomplete.

Stability/Neutrality

I don't see any problems here. You don't hesitate to use vibrant language, i.e. "short-circuited", but it never seems like you are pushing a particular point of view.

Images

Lots of images, dynamically presented. Excellent job.

Overall

This is a fun and intriguing article, very well researched and written. The comments above are suggestions for further improvement, but I am happy to pass this as a GA. Keep up the good work! --Cerebellum (talk) 20:35, 12 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]