Talk:Stephen Tomašević of Bosnia
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Stephen Tomašević of Bosnia article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1 |
![]() | Stephen Tomašević of Bosnia has been listed as one of the History 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. | ||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
![]() | A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on February 10, 2014. The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that King Stephen Tomašević of Bosnia (pictured) lost two realms and his head to Mehmed the Conqueror, much as he had predicted? | ||||||||||||
Current status: Good article |
![]() | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
Peer review
editBased on agreement with GA nominator of this article (reached here) I intend to conduct a peer review here. I am not very much familiar with the subject because the subject of my interest and work on wikipedia is Ottoman Empire and its history on the Balkans. Therefore comments are very much welcome.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 18:25, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
Title: The reviewer believes that the title SToB styled for himself should be presented in the lede and/or infobox. Nominator disagrees.
|
---|
|
Addition of the map of the region would significantly increase informativeness of the text. Nominator agrees.
|
---|
|
Reviewer presented sources which present 1438 as year of SToB's year of birth and proposed addition of this information because it corresponds with real events, but with attribution considering non-exceptional sources. Nominator is sceptical.
|
---|
|
The text of the article should be expanded with details about SToB's early life. Nominator agrees and emphasize that re SToB's early life sources only describe his education.
|
---|
|
Reviewer proposed expansion of the lede to clarify and present summarized background of political context in mid 15th century Kingdom Bosnia with all threats to its existence, without oversimplification regarding Ottoman Empire.
|
---|
|
Konstantinovic - It is necessary to clarify who is Konstantinovic.
|
---|
|
The Ottoman conquest of Bosnia was clarified.
|
---|
|
Lack of strong resistance to the Ottomans - Its background (higher taxes and religious persecution) should be presented in the lede.
|
---|
|
Сmнпɖɴ - Unsourced and removed.
|
---|
|
Too long caption - The caption of the image in infobox is too long.
|
---|
|
- Single source for large portion of text. The large portion of text (1,135 characters) in the first paragraph of Family section are supported only by one source. Work of Franciscan friar Dominik Mandic, which is at least not of the first grade reliability. --Antidiskriminator (talk) 23:23, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
- Religion in the infobox - The infobox presents his religion as Catholic although the text of the article clarifies that he was raised as a member of the Bosnian Church, converted to Roman Catholicism. If that is so, Bosnian Church should be presented as well.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 23:28, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
- The article states that his father was raised as a member of the Bosnian Church. Stephen Tomašević was raised as a Roman Catholic from early childhood. Surtsicna (talk) 18:51, 9 January 2015 (UTC)
- The text of the article does not directly support early childhood thesis. Both his mother and his father Stephan Tomas belonged to Bosnian church. Tomas converted to Catholicism only in 1445. Per my comment below, Tomasevic was first baptised then learned Lattin letters (which was not in early childhood) and then decided to embrace Catholic faith (I doubt it could happen in early childhood). Though, I admit that I haven't seen sources which directly support his membership to Bosnian church.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 22:34, 9 January 2015 (UTC)
- But we have no idea when Stephen Tomašević was born. He may have been born in 1442, for all we know. Besides, the article reports what the sources say.[1] Surtsicna (talk) 00:02, 10 January 2015 (UTC)
- Not completely true. SToB was certainly born before 1445 when his parents were divorced.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 00:20, 10 January 2015 (UTC)
- But we have no idea when Stephen Tomašević was born. He may have been born in 1442, for all we know. Besides, the article reports what the sources say.[1] Surtsicna (talk) 00:02, 10 January 2015 (UTC)
- The text of the article does not directly support early childhood thesis. Both his mother and his father Stephan Tomas belonged to Bosnian church. Tomas converted to Catholicism only in 1445. Per my comment below, Tomasevic was first baptised then learned Lattin letters (which was not in early childhood) and then decided to embrace Catholic faith (I doubt it could happen in early childhood). Though, I admit that I haven't seen sources which directly support his membership to Bosnian church.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 22:34, 9 January 2015 (UTC)
- The article states that his father was raised as a member of the Bosnian Church. Stephen Tomašević was raised as a Roman Catholic from early childhood. Surtsicna (talk) 18:51, 9 January 2015 (UTC)
- Source interpretation - I am uncertain if source is properly interpreted in below example:
- The source says: "The new king claimed that as a boy he had been baptized, learned Latin letters and firmly grasped the Christian (i.e. Catholic) faith. "
- The article says: "Stephen Thomas, raised as a member of the Bosnian Church, converted to Roman Catholicism in c. 1445; Stephen Tomašević later stated that he had been baptized into the Roman Catholic Church as a child, and that he had been taught Latin letters." - If I am not wrong, this sentence could mislead readers to believe that he later denied he was raised as member of the Bosnian Church. AFAICS The source does not mention "later", stated ≠ claimed, and Catholicism is mentioned with faith, not with baptism.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 23:52, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
- Could it be that you are confusing the father (Stephen Thomas) and son (Stephen Tomašević)? It was the father who converted in 1445, and thereafter had his son raised as a Roman Catholic. Surtsicna (talk) 18:51, 9 January 2015 (UTC)
- No. Stephen was born to Vojača and Stephen Tomas, both members of Bosnian Church. Stephen Tomasevic was born well before 1445 (when his father decided to convert to Catholicism). That is why it is important not to misinterpret sources to mislead readers that Stephen Tomasevic was baptised as Catholic. The source present differnt chronology which correspond to real events. --Antidiskriminator (talk) 22:04, 9 January 2015 (UTC)
- He was most certainly not baptized as a "krstjanin". The Bosnian Church did not baptize minors, and the sacrament itself differed substantially from that administered by the Roman Catholic (or any Orthodox) Church. For one thing, it was performed with a holy book rather than water. Since Stephen Tomašević wrote this in a letter sent to the pope in an attempt to prove his loyalty to the Holy See, and since the baptism clearly took place in his childhood rather than in his adulthood, it seems clear that he meant Catholic baptism. Surtsicna (talk) 23:43, 9 January 2015 (UTC)
- I think your reply again prove my point. You say: "Stephen Tomašević wrote this in a letter sent to the pope in an attempt to prove his loyalty to the Holy See" Does it mean everything he wrote in that letter was true. Of course not. That is why source uses the word "claimed" instead of "stated" you used. You misinterpreted the source and presented it as fact. The source does not mention "later", stated ≠ claimed and Catholicism is mentioned after baptism and learning Latin.
- I know nothing about Bosnian church and its baptism procedure. Can you present some sources for your statement that Bosnian Church did not baptize minors?--Antidiskriminator (talk) 00:15, 10 January 2015 (UTC)
- To be honest, I have no idea how I am proving your point because I am not certain what your point is or how I am misinterpreting the source. The article does not say that Stephen Tomašević was baptized into the Roman Catholic Church as a child. It says that he "stated that he had been baptized into the Roman Catholic Church as a child". He did state that, and the source says so. The verb "claim", used by Fine, means "to state to be true".[2] For all intents and purposes, the words are synonymous.
- Here are some Google Book Search results concerning the Bosnian Church view on baptism. "They [krstjani lived an ascetic life, baptized only adults, and so forth.]" Surtsicna (talk) 00:52, 10 January 2015 (UTC)
- Please read WP:CLAIM.
- Thanks for the link you presented. It says: "Different historical sources show diametrically opposed images of Bosnian Church doctrine". I will try to research this issue, but the link you presented shows that your interpretation about baptising only adults is not necessary correct.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 01:07, 10 January 2015 (UTC)
- WP:CLAIM: "Said, stated, described, wrote, and according to are almost always neutral and accurate." So, you are saying that the wording I used is perfect. Thank you.
- It is not up to me to interpret anything. As a Wikipedia editor, I report what secondary sources say, i.e. their interpretations of primary sources. Secondary sources say that the Bosnian Church rejected the baptism of the children and the baptism with water. Surtsicna (talk) 01:40, 10 January 2015 (UTC)
- No. Another misinterpretation of my position and source which does not use neutral wording. On the contrary. It explains background to the letter of SToB to pope and use word "claim".
- Those who dig a pit will fall in it. Every time you try to misinterpret my position you successfully refute your position. If members of Bosnian Church indeed rejected baptism of the children, like you insist, SToB was certainly not baptised to Catholicism as child because his parents were members of Bosnian Church when he was a child. OR interpretations are not constructive. It is necessary to stick to reliable sources, which do not support "baptized into the Roman Catholic Church as a child".--Antidiskriminator (talk) 12:42, 10 January 2015 (UTC)
- He was most certainly not baptized as a "krstjanin". The Bosnian Church did not baptize minors, and the sacrament itself differed substantially from that administered by the Roman Catholic (or any Orthodox) Church. For one thing, it was performed with a holy book rather than water. Since Stephen Tomašević wrote this in a letter sent to the pope in an attempt to prove his loyalty to the Holy See, and since the baptism clearly took place in his childhood rather than in his adulthood, it seems clear that he meant Catholic baptism. Surtsicna (talk) 23:43, 9 January 2015 (UTC)
- No. Stephen was born to Vojača and Stephen Tomas, both members of Bosnian Church. Stephen Tomasevic was born well before 1445 (when his father decided to convert to Catholicism). That is why it is important not to misinterpret sources to mislead readers that Stephen Tomasevic was baptised as Catholic. The source present differnt chronology which correspond to real events. --Antidiskriminator (talk) 22:04, 9 January 2015 (UTC)
- Could it be that you are confusing the father (Stephen Thomas) and son (Stephen Tomašević)? It was the father who converted in 1445, and thereafter had his son raised as a Roman Catholic. Surtsicna (talk) 18:51, 9 January 2015 (UTC)
- Date of death - The date of death is not cited. --Antidiskriminator (talk) 22:20, 9 January 2015 (UTC)
- There are two references in the paragraph about his death. One of them gives the precise date. Surtsicna (talk) 01:08, 10 January 2015 (UTC)
- Will you please point to the reference that gives the precise date?--Antidiskriminator (talk) 01:38, 10 January 2015 (UTC)
- Yes, of course. Ljubez, page 157. Surtsicna (talk) 01:44, 10 January 2015 (UTC)
- No reference mentions page 157.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 12:44, 10 January 2015 (UTC)
- Yes, of course. Ljubez, page 157. Surtsicna (talk) 01:44, 10 January 2015 (UTC)
- Will you please point to the reference that gives the precise date?--Antidiskriminator (talk) 01:38, 10 January 2015 (UTC)
- There are two references in the paragraph about his death. One of them gives the precise date. Surtsicna (talk) 01:08, 10 January 2015 (UTC)
- Place of burrial - The text of the article mentions circumstantial evidence about the place of burial of SToB. The only source used there is Babinger (p 222) does not support that "circumstantial evidence". On the contrary. He emphasize that "it is by no means certain" that bones shown in Franciscan monastery are bones of SToB. If that is so, the infobox should be corrected accordingly.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 23:58, 9 January 2015 (UTC)
- Different versions of his death - Many sources present different versions of his death (sultan strangled him personally, that his skin was ripped, that archers shot him with arrows when he was tied..... --Antidiskriminator (talk) 18:56, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
- Ottomans captured his half-sister Katarina and half-brother Sigismund - Many sources say that Ottomans captured his half-sister Katarina and half-brother Sigismund after they killed him.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 18:59, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
GA Review
editGA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
- This review is transcluded from Talk:Stephen Tomašević of Bosnia/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Caponer (talk · contribs) 21:11, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
Surtsicna, I will begin my comprehensive review of this article within the next 48 hours. Please let me know if you have any questions or comments in the meantime! -- Caponer (talk) 21:11, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
- It is reasonably well written.
- It is factually accurate and verifiable.
- a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
- a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
- It is broad in its coverage.
- a (major aspects): b (focused):
- a (major aspects): b (focused):
- It follows the neutral point of view policy.
- Fair representation without bias:
- Fair representation without bias:
- It is stable.
- No edit wars, etc.:
- No edit wars, etc.:
- It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
- a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
- a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
- Overall:
- Pass/Fail:
- Pass/Fail:
Surtsicna, you've authored a very comprehensive, well-written, and thoroughly researched article. Upon my review, I find that your article meets Good Article criteria, but I did have a few recommendations and suggestions that I'd like you to address before passing. Most of them are with regard to the lede. Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns in the meantime! Thanks! -- Caponer (talk) 14:01, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
Lede
- "He desperately tried to secure help from Pope Pius II, King Matthias Corvinus of Hungary and other neighbouring countries." In this sentence, it is stated that Stephen sought assistance from two monarchs, and other neighboring countries. Would it be more consistent to say other neighboring monarchs? ...or other neighboring leaders? Or if the countries are more notable, you could say he sought assistance from the Papal States, Hungary, and other neighboring countries. I'll leave it up to you on how best to remedy this.
- Modified accordingly. -- Caponer (talk) 23:51, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
- Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lead section, the lede should be a comprehensive summary of all an article's parts, therefore, I suggest adding more content from the "Assessment and legacy" section, perhaps expounding upon your final sentence regarding the fall of Bosnia to the Ottomans.
- With those minor exceptions, I find that your lede to this article summarizes the majority of the article's prose, so I have no other suggestions for this section.
- This section is good to go upon final re-review. -- Caponer (talk) 23:51, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
Name
- This section is thoroughly referenced and well-written. I find that it clearly meets GA guidelines and have no further suggestions.
- This section is good to go upon final re-review. -- Caponer (talk) 23:51, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
Family
- Per WP:CITEDENSE, internal citations should usually be reserved for the end of a sentence, even though I understand your rationale for placing an internal citation after a comma within a sentence. This isn't a deal breaker, but something to be mindful of. This is in reference to the last sentence in the second paragraph.
- As this is only a suggestion, the inline citations can remain in their current locations of the sentence. -- Caponer (talk) 23:54, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
- As was the "Name" section, this section is thoroughly referenced and well-written. I find that it clearly meets GA guidelines and have no further suggestions.
- This section is good to go upon final re-review. -- Caponer (talk) 23:54, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
Marriage Despotism Kingship Assessment and legacy
- All the above sections are also beautifully written, and their inline citations are plentiful and verifiable. I've spent most of my review going through the internal citations and those texts that are available online. Again, I'd try where possible to consolidate inline citations and place them at the end of the sentences.
- This section is good to go upon final re-review. -- Caponer (talk) 23:54, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
GAN Status
editCaponer, Surticna has not edited on Wikipedia since January 11, four days before you started the review. Since it's been a month and a half since you posted your review, I think it's clear that the article isn't likely to change. You'll either have to accept the article as it is, make any needed changes yourself, or fail it—and from your comment above, the first is more likely than the last. BlueMoonset (talk) 05:04, 2 March 2015 (UTC)
- BlueMoonset, thank you for the ping! I will make the updates myself in the next day or two. Thanks again! -- Caponer (talk) 23:08, 2 March 2015 (UTC)
- Surtsicna, as there were only minor corrections and suggestions, I've modified the article and find that it meets good article status upon final re-review. I hope you come back to Wikipedia soon and write another fantastic article soon. BlueMoonset, thank you for our attention to this review. -- Caponer (talk) 23:54, 4 March 2015 (UTC)