Talk:Crusading movement/GA5

GA Review

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

Nominator: Norfolkbigfish (talk · contribs) 13:16, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: AirshipJungleman29 (talk · contribs) 10:27, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'll take this under review, as I noted at WT:GAN. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 10:27, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comments: @AirshipJungleman29 and Norfolkbigfish: Where are we regarding the status of this article? It's been a while since this review was updated and with the GANR backlog drive coming up I want to make sure all potential articles are able to be included. IntentionallyDense ^(Contribs) 20:44, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Under review IntentionallyDense. This article has been the subject of significant attention regarding close paraphrasing and copyright, so I'm going through most of the sources to check. As you can see, there are a lot of sources. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 20:57, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  Understandable. Just wanted to make sure you hadn't forgotten about it. The sources on this article are quite impressive, best of luck to you and the nominator. IntentionallyDense ^(Contribs) 21:02, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  
  Didn't realise that you had started @AirshipJungleman29 - give us a heads up if there remain any areas of concern and we can resolve. It has been redrafted so I am not expecting any, but we will see. Norfolkbigfish (talk) 13:33, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  Well, there are a couple of things I have noticed already, Norfolkbigfish.
  Number one: while the prose is certainly understandable, concise and clear, it is not very well-written. For example, "There was more contractual recruitment. The requirement for intelligence and espionage had grown. Naval warfare was increasingly important. Alliances required grooming. Innovative tactics were developed with different variations deployed depending on circumstances. Expertise in siege warfare were expensive.", with six sentences in two lines, just about meets the GA criteria, but is not "well-written". You will need to work on this if you plan to take this article to FAC.
  Number two, more pertinently for GA and this article in particular, there are still passages that are not supported by sources. For example, in "Legacy", we have:
  
  "This is a view that was contested. The Latin settlements did not align neatly with the typical definition a colony. They were neither directly controlled or exploited by a homeland. Historians have used the idea of a religious colony in order to accommodate these discrepancies in their colonial theories. A different definition covers a territory conquered and settled with religious motivation. This territory maintains close contact with its homeland, share the same religious views and requires support in both military and financial terms. Venetian Greece carved out of the Byzantine Empire as a result of the crusading movement following the Fourth Crusade offers a better match to the traditional model of colonialism. Venice had a political and economic stake in these territories. Indeed, this was to such a degree that the region attracted settlers that would otherwise migrated to the Latin East. In this way its success actually weakened the crusader states."
  
  where the latter half of the text is not supported by the provided source, and the sentence "Historians have used the idea of a religious colony in order to accommodate these discrepancies in their colonial theories." I would classify as a misrepresentation.
  
  This is why, as previous reviewers have noted, the article needs a thorough check for text-source integrity, which I am doing. You may want to conduct your own simultaneous check to eliminate errors before I come across them. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 13:43, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  How is this misrepresentation? Phillips in the Oxford writes on pages 112 & 113:Some historians believe that the concept of colonialism carries too many emotive associations to be useful when discussing the history of the crusades because it tends to evoke images based upon episodes such as the British settlement of North America or the Spanish invasion of the New World. They maintain that traditional definitions suggest that a colony is politically directed by, or economically exploited for the benefit of, a homeland, or subject to really large-scale migration. These do not fit the Latin settlements in the Levant before 1291.
  
  Conquest was undertaken to recover and assure the security of Christian control of the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem, and therefore it may be worth putting forward the concept of religious colonization. The resulting 'colony' can be defined as territory captured and settled primarily for religious reasons, the inhabitants of which maintain close contact with their homeland principally on account of a shared faith, and their need for financial and military assistance.
  
  Looks pretty similar to the point of the sentence, but anny suggestions on wording would be gratefully recieved. Norfolkbigfish (talk) 18:21, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  Added page 30 to the citation to support the second half of the paragraph, and reworded as per point one above. Norfolkbigfish (talk) 20:33, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  
  "Historians" — Phillips does not mention any others, just that this is their viewpoint. "to accommodate these discrepancies in their colonial theories" — there are no disrepancies to be accomodated, just an alternative theory. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 23:38, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  OK, I have struck the sentence. I think that addresses all the points raised to date? Norfolkbigfish (talk) 08:36, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  Have you any further feedback on this @AirshipJungleman29? Norfolkbigfish (talk) 16:34, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  Not on this particular point, but of course the issues with turgid prose remain throughout the article. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 23:42, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  Could you provide details please @AirshipJungleman29? Norfolkbigfish (talk) 11:18, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  Well, it's fairly straightforward—like the above example, lots of short sentences, many of which can be combined, one after another. A few examples:
  
  The creation of disciplined units was challenging. In feudal Europe strategy and institutions were too immature. Power structures were too fragmented.
  These works extolled adventure, courage, charity and manners. The church could not accept readily all the values presented.
  King Philip IV of France extinguished the Templars around 1312. This was probably for financial and political reasons. He pressurized Pope Clement V to dissolve the order.
  Muslim characters were described as evil and as less than human. Their physical appearance was described as devilish and they were represented as having dark skin. Islamic ritual was mocked and insults made to Mohammad. This caricature continued to be used long after the fighting over territory subsided.
  
  This is non-exhaustive, you should go through the article and make sure that this sort of stop-start prose is edited. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 11:57, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  Thank you @AirshipJungleman29. All of these have been addressed and I will act on your advice. Where are you with the source check? Norfolkbigfish (talk) 17:22, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]