Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/House of Loredan/archive1
- The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.
The article was archived by Gog the Mild via FACBot (talk) 9 April 2021 [1].
- Nominator(s): San Marco Venice (talk) 14:19, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
This article is about the House of Loredan, a noble house which played a significant role in the History of the Republic of Venice of the Republic of Venice, and was influential in various regions across the Eastern Mediterranean.
I believe the article meets the Featured Articles criteria because it checks out the attributes of a featured article, as listed on Wikipedia:
The article is well-written. It features excellent British English and a professional style of writing.
The article is comprehensive. It features virtually everything about the family, including its origins and cadet branches, history organised by centuries, genealogical tables, notable members, estates, as well as the influence it had, organised by regions).
The article is well-researched. It features around 100 sources, mostly books (many written by historians), but also websites and media articles. The research also included many hours of researching the genealogy and ancestry, as well as going through multiple family trees, to be able to write the paragraph about the genealogy of the family.
The article is neutral. It features both the good (role in the creation of modern opera, patronage of world-famous artists) and the bad (involvement in creating the first Jewish ghetto, exploitation of feudal subjects, corruption and the “buying” of political positions) sides of the family history.
The article is stable (it is not subject to edit wars) and is compliant with Wikipedia’s policies.
In terms of style, the article follows the listed guidelines: It features a lead (lede) which summarises the contents and gives an overview of multiple topics which are discussed further in the article. It follows an appropriate structure, with neatly organised paragraphs which describe everything significant about the family. It features consistent citations, and many sentences are followed by inline citations from multiple sources. The article also features a comprehensive infobox containing plenty of important information, as well as multiple tables, such as one containing the list of titles which members of the family have held.
In terms of media, the article features many paintings (such as portraits featuring its most important members), as well as a gallery of photographs of the family’s palaces. It also features a gallery of paintings of the family’s Venetian estates by great Italian painters. All photos feature an informative description. For instance, all paintings feature the name, artist, year (if known) and the museum or gallery where the painting is displayed. The end of the article features two galleries: one about the family depictions in painting, and one about depictions in sculpture.
In terms of length, the article is long but stays focused on the main topic, with the goal of being comprehensive and presenting everything significant about the family.
- Oppose, and suggest withdrawal. There is considerable uncited text, the lead is not organized, there are MOS issues like MOS:SANDWICHing and MOS:OVERLINKing, the article is listy, there are excessive galleries, citations are incomplete, there is WP:CITATION OVERKILL, prose redundancies (“in addition ... also”), and Earwig copyvio tool reveals concerns. This article is not to the level of GA yet, and should probably not be rated B-class. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:38, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) Oppose - A lot of work obviously went into this, but it's not ready for FAC. I'd recommend WP:PEER REVIEW and then WP:GAN as a starter, and then work up to FAC. There's a lot of uncited text in here - basically everything will need cited. The number of images in the galleries is too large, and there are some MOS:SANDWICH problems with image layout in places. Your inline citations to books will need page numbers. I hate to oppose this quick, as a massive amount of work obviously went into this, but it needs some more work before FA. I'd recommend peer review, where there's no time limit. Hog Farm Talk 14:39, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
- Closing note: This candidate has been archived, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FAC/ar, and leave the {{featured article candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through.
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.