Talk:1292–1294 papal election

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the 1292–1294 papal election article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Roman Curia (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Roman Curia, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Roman CuriaWikipedia:WikiProject Roman CuriaTemplate:WikiProject Roman CuriaRoman Curia articles

European Microstates: Vatican City

	Europe portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject European Microstates, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of European Microstates 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.European MicrostatesWikipedia:WikiProject European MicrostatesTemplate:WikiProject European MicrostatesEuropean Microstates articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	Vatican City portal This article is supported by WikiProject Vatican City (assessed as High-importance).

Catholicism Mid‑importance

1292–1294 papal election 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

Christianity Low‑importance

	Christianity portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity 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.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Middle Ages Low‑importance

	Middle Ages portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Middle Ages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Middle Ages 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.Middle AgesWikipedia:WikiProject Middle AgesTemplate:WikiProject Middle AgesMiddle Ages articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Politics Low‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics 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.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Elections and Referendums

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Elections and Referendums, an ongoing effort to improve the quality of, expand upon and create new articles relating to elections, electoral reform and other aspects of democratic decision-making. For more information, visit our project page.Elections and ReferendumsWikipedia:WikiProject Elections and ReferendumsTemplate:WikiProject Elections and ReferendumsElections and Referendums articles

1292–1294 papal election 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
May 9, 2008	Good article nominee	Listed

A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on April 19, 2008.

The text of the entry was: Did you know ...that the papal election, 1292–1294 was the last election of a pope which did not take the form of a conclave?

GA Review

I will begin the GA review by April 21. Cheers, Majoreditor (talk) 04:20, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Savidan, this is a well-constructed short article. It's well-referenced and fairly comprehensive. The writing is good, although the prose aren't quite brilliant.

There are just a few issues which need addressing before I pass the article:

Please refactor the lengthy parenthetical statement in the lead's second paragraph.
The lead mentions that this was the last papal election which did not take the form of a conclave. It would be best if you elaborate in the body of the article. I'd recommend adding a paragrap providing details on the evolution of papal elections into conclave form; it would be particularly useful if you could show how this election factors into that evolution.
It's not required, but a image would enhance the article.

I'll place the article on hold. Please contact me should you have any questions or comments. Cheers, Majoreditor (talk) 01:34, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have completed two of your three requests. However, I am uncomfortable with the middle one because it sounds like original research. I have provided a see also link to the papal election, 1268-1271 that provides the information you seek. As for this article, the only real way it relates to the conclave is that the pope elected reinstated the conclave and it happened to stick this time. Savidan 02:38, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the quick response, Savidan.

The reason why I suggested more information about the role of this election in the evolution of papal selection was because a considerable portion of the lead discusses how this particular election was the last one not constituted as a conclave. To quote from WP:LEAD, "In general, the relative emphasis given to material in the lead should reflect its relative importance to the subject according to reliable sources. Significant information should not appear in the lead if it is not covered in the remainder of the article."

What I suggested is to add material to the article's body which expands upon the discussion in the lead. Of course, this should be done only using solidly-referenced material from reliable sources, not through original research or synthesis. Another option would be to remove some of the material from the lead and place it into the body of the article to provide better balance. I usually tend toward expanding an article rather than re-arranging material; however, if reliably sourced material isn't available then it's OK to re-work the lead.

I'd also like to see a bulletpoint-free lead. Try short, simple sentences.

You have selected some excellent images. Great work! They really enrich the article. Cheers, Majoreditor (talk) 16:40, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Checking to see how it's coming along. Majoreditor (talk) 16:38, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh sorry I completely forgot about this. I can remove the bulletpoints, I guess, but I think the other part of your comment is a double edged sword. If I move it to the body, suddenly there's something in the article which isn't summarized in the lead; so either I make the article repetitive, delete valuable content, or meaninglessly move information aroudn. The fact of the matter is that there is not a lot of germane and sourced extrapolation to make from these sentences. They are assessing the macrohistorical importance of the specific happenings of the election, and are thus summarizing it. Savidan 02:42, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'd suggest moving all but the first sentence of the second paragraph to the body of the article and refactoring the second paragraph in the lead to include more information about the election itsself. Your thoughts? Majoreditor (talk) 16:40, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(<-)Checking in once again.... Majoreditor (talk) 02:09, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, your reply must have come at a busy time on my watchlist. You're suggestion is OK and I'll do it now. Savidan 02:21, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Great work. GA Pass. Cheers, Majoreditor (talk) 02:51, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Legacy

The following sentence occurs in that section: "Two subsequent papal elections may be considered possible exceptions, although they adhered to the laws of the conclave to a great degree: the Council of Constance, which elected Pope Martin V to end the Western Schism, and the papal conclave, 1799-1800, for which Pope Pius VI suspended Ubi Periculum due to the interference of Napoléon Bonaparte.[21]" Both examples are highly inaccurate. The election of 1417 was unique, in that it was authorized by a Council which was retroactively deemed to be Ecumenical and legitimate. In the election of 1417, it was not just Ubi Periculum which was suspended, but also (and more importantly, subsequent papal legislation which had long since rendered Ubi Periculum obsolete. In 1799, when Pius VI died, Napoleon was in Egypt and had been there for months; when he returned, he started a revolution in Paris that overthrew the Directory. He was not involved in suspending any papal constitutions. Trollope, an English protestant with a far from neutral view of the Papacy, and sometimes a flippant attitude, and who relied on unreliable sources, is not a good authority. The whole effort to provide a "Legacy" is strained. Vicedomino (talk) 04:33, 30 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]