Talk:1314–1316 conclave
Appearance
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the 1314–1316 conclave 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 |
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | 1314–1316 conclave was a Philosophy and religion good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
![]() | A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on August 15, 2008. The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that the protracted papal conclave, 1314–1316, the first of the Avignon Papacy, was mediated by three incumbent and future French monarchs in succession? |
GA Review
[edit]- This review is transcluded from Talk:Papal conclave, 1314–1316/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
- GA review (see here for criteria)
- It is reasonably well written.
- a (prose):
b (MoS):
- The lead is not all-inclusive; the lead is supposed to summarize the article, not introduce it (the lead should be sufficient to understand the topic and its outcome without reading the rest). The outcome is not mentioned in the summary. Otherwise the article is well written, with good prose and in line with the Manual of Style.
- a (prose):
- It is factually accurate and verifiable.
- a (references):
b (citations to reliable sources):
c (OR):
- The list of electors is not sourced, neither is the last paragraph of the "aftermath" section.
- a (references):
- It is broad in its coverage.
- a (major aspects):
b (focused):
- a (major aspects):
- 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, where possible and appropriate.
- a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):
b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
- User "upright" syntax with portrait (tall) images.
- a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):
- Overall:
- Pass/Fail:
- The article is on hold until the issues mentioned are resolved. Arsenikk (talk) 14:39, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
- After two and a half weeks the issues have not been seen to, so I am forced to fail the article as good. A shame, since there was so little to, and unfortunately I do not have the knowledge to fix them all. Arsenikk (talk) 14:55, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
- The article is on hold until the issues mentioned are resolved. Arsenikk (talk) 14:39, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
- Pass/Fail:
Move discussion in progress
[edit]There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:2025 papal conclave which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 17:15, 8 June 2025 (UTC)
Categories:
- C-Class European Microstates articles
- Unknown-importance European Microstates articles
- C-Class Vatican City articles
- High-importance Vatican City articles
- Vatican City articles
- WikiProject European Microstates articles
- C-Class Catholicism articles
- Low-importance Catholicism articles
- WikiProject Catholicism articles
- C-Class Middle Ages articles
- Low-importance Middle Ages articles
- C-Class history articles
- All WikiProject Middle Ages pages
- C-Class Elections and Referendums articles
- WikiProject Elections and Referendums articles
- Former good article nominees
- Wikipedia Did you know articles