Talk:Gabriel Báthory/GA1
GA Review
[edit]| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: David Fuchs (talk · contribs) 15:11, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
Review in progress. I should have comments posted by the end of next week. Cheers, Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs talk 15:11, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
- General, prose:
I think the lead suffers a bit from an unclear flow and presentation of details. Given the length of the article (3600 words including the lead) I think streamlining it down to 2–3 paragraphs would help with some of the below.This review is from the perspective of someone who knows basically nothing about 17th century Transylvanian politics, but given that Wikipedia is for a general audience, I think a little less presumption of knowledge would greatly help clarity here.He was the nephew of Andrew Báthory, who was prince of Transylvania in 1599. After his father died in 1601, the wealthy Stephen Báthory became his guardian and converted him from Catholicism to Calvinism. This sequencing is a little weird. I'm not sure "he was the nephew of this guy" is the most important next detail to have, especially since it doesn't apparently relate here to him becoming prince of Transylvania or his father's death.Most of this whole paragraph doesn't clearly relate: Gabriel laid claim to Transylvania, but the Diet of Transylvania elected the elderly Sigismund Rákóczi (Bocskai's former governor) prince in February 1606. Gabriel sought assistance from Rudolph, the king of Royal Hungary, promising to strengthen the Roman Catholic Church's position if he were elected prince. The irregular Hajdú troops rebelled in the autumn of 1607. Gabriel concluded a treaty with them in February 1608, promising to grant landed property to them and expel Catholics and Unitarians from the royal council. His claim was denied, and I guess he led troops into some sort of battle, or fought a rebellion? But it's unclear how that relates to him getting the job, how Rudolph actually assisted, or even why he would assist given you told me before he was now a calvinist. I dunno who the Hajdu troops are; they should be introduced better if they're going to factor into the rest of the lead.
Sigismund Báthory abdicated in favor of Gabriel's uncle, Andrew, in early 1599.—where'd this other uncle come from? If he's got multiple ones you should adjust the mentions (such as "One of Gabriel's uncles, Balthasar, was an opposition leader" or similar.)Michael the Brave, Prince of Wallachia, invaded Transylvania and defeated Andrew with the assistance of Székely troops.—why and when did Wallachia invade?and their scattered estates in Szatmár, Szabolcs and Kraszna Counties were seized by Peter Szaniszlófi. Who is Szaniszlófi? If he's not that important to the narrative since he only shows up here, why is he mentioned?Stephen Bocskai rose up against Rudolph with the support of irregular Hajdú troops—who? When?Gabriel's strength was legendary, and he was said to be able to break horseshoes with his bare hands.—that's interesting, but doesn't relate to the sentences around it.Young noblemen (including his future enemy, Gabriel Bethlen)—is this Gabriel's enemy or Stephen's?persuaded the dying (and often unconscious) Bocskai —when did he start dying? This comes out of nowhere.Gabriel had demanded the Principality of Transylvania in a 2 January 1607 letter to the grand vizier, Kuyucu Murad Pasha.—why is he asking the vizier of the Ottoman Empire about this? There's been nothing about the principality being under Ottoman control before this.It's not particularly clear that the Diet of Transylvania and the delegates of the Three Nations are the same thing.According to Nagy Szabó's memoirs—who?to secure his recognition by the Sublime Porte and the royal court—what are these? Why particularly did he need to seek recognition?from Gyulafehérvár (now Alba Iulia in Romania), which had been destroyed.—when did this happen? Why?The treaty outraged Ahmed I, who decided to replace Gabriel with Bethlen in March He was sentenced to death the previous section. What happened?According to Máté Szepsi Lackó—who?- The article just ends with Bathory dying—is there no info about his legacy, views of his rule, etc?
- References:
- Only sources I have available to check against was Early Modern Religious Communities in Central-East Europe; I didn't spot any issues with plagiarism or incongruities on a spot-check. (Cites 6, 12, 61)
Do you have access to Nagy and/or Barta? I wouldn't feel comfortable passing as GA unless I can verify more citations.On that note, what makes Nagy (1988), Jakó (2009), and Markó (2000) reliable sources?
- Media:
- File:Bocskai and his hajdú warriors.jpg doesn't have date, author, or source info, so no way to verify its license as free.
- Is there a reason File:FLORUS 1647 PCF030.jpg has the black border, or can it be cropped in on the actual subject matter?
--Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs talk 19:02, 24 September 2019 (UTC)
- @David Fuchs:, thank you for your comprehensive review and also for your above comments. I made significant changes, so I think your above concerns were addressed. A version of Barta's work is available online ([1]). Yes, I own Nagy's work, but it could hardly be available to you. Nagy was a leading military historian, Jakó's work is part of a monography dedicated to Gabriel Bethlen and written by Debrecen University historians, Markó is an editor of historical encyclopedias. Borsoka (talk) 03:52, 28 September 2019 (UTC)
- Thanks for the followup Borsoka. I was able to check a few more statements to the Barta source you mentioned, so I'll consider that a good enough spot-check. The article reads much better with the added context, thanks for adding it. The final consideration left untouched is if there's any useful information on the legacy of Bathory and his reign; the article just currently ends and doesn't particularly feel like a full article. What did historians of the time that you've quoted think of him? His subjects? Has there been any critical reappraisal? Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs talk 14:28, 28 September 2019 (UTC)
- @David Fuchs:, I expanded the article with an evaluation ([2]). Thank you for your patience. Borsoka (talk) 01:28, 5 October 2019 (UTC)
- Thanks. The article is much improved and I think meets GA standards. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs talk 14:05, 5 October 2019 (UTC)
- Thank you for your suggestions and for promoting the article. Have a nice week! Borsoka (talk) 01:24, 6 October 2019 (UTC)
- Thanks. The article is much improved and I think meets GA standards. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs talk 14:05, 5 October 2019 (UTC)
- @David Fuchs:, I expanded the article with an evaluation ([2]). Thank you for your patience. Borsoka (talk) 01:28, 5 October 2019 (UTC)
- Thanks for the followup Borsoka. I was able to check a few more statements to the Barta source you mentioned, so I'll consider that a good enough spot-check. The article reads much better with the added context, thanks for adding it. The final consideration left untouched is if there's any useful information on the legacy of Bathory and his reign; the article just currently ends and doesn't particularly feel like a full article. What did historians of the time that you've quoted think of him? His subjects? Has there been any critical reappraisal? Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs talk 14:28, 28 September 2019 (UTC)
- @David Fuchs:, thank you for your comprehensive review and also for your above comments. I made significant changes, so I think your above concerns were addressed. A version of Barta's work is available online ([1]). Yes, I own Nagy's work, but it could hardly be available to you. Nagy was a leading military historian, Jakó's work is part of a monography dedicated to Gabriel Bethlen and written by Debrecen University historians, Markó is an editor of historical encyclopedias. Borsoka (talk) 03:52, 28 September 2019 (UTC)