Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Timeline of the Kingdom of Jerusalem/archive2

< Wikipedia:Featured list candidates

Timeline of the Kingdom of Jerusalem

edit

Timeline of the Kingdom of Jerusalem (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Toolbox
Nominator(s): Borsoka (talk) 10:01, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The chronological list presents the main events of the history of the most important crusader state, including data about its society and economy. I would highly appreciate any suggestions to improve it. Thank you for your time. Borsoka (talk) 10:01, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

History6042's grammar review

edit
First kingdom
edit
  • "Saladin annihilated the crusader army in the Battle of Hattin on 4 July 1187, and occupied almost the whole kingdom during the following months." -> "Saladin defeated the Crusader army in the Battle of Hattin on 4 July 1187, and occupied most kingdom during the following months." Annihilated does not sound very neutral, Crusader should be capitalized, and last sentence should be rewritten.
  • I preferred the word "destroyed" because it was a catastophic defeat. I think "most kingdom" is not grammatical.
  • "Christians regard the Calvary" -> "Christians regard Calvary" There should be no "the"
  • "Pope Gregory VII is planning to launch a military campaign" -> "Pope Gregory VII plans to launch a military campaign" Make the tense consistent.
  • "pentitential pilgrimages with the conceptpentitential pilgrimages with the concept" -> "penitential pilgrimages with the concept" Spelling error.
  • "A Pisan fleet arrives at Syria" -> "A Pisan fleet arrives on Syria" Wrong preposition.
  • "The Latin patriarchate seizes a districtin Jerusalem." -> "The Latin patriarchate seizes a district in Jerusalem." Separate words.
  • "one-third of his troops perishes" -> "one-third of his troops perish"
  • "in the battlefield." -> "on the battlefield."
  • "The Romanesque Church of Saint Anne is built in Jerusalem." Needs a source.
  • "such as Counts Stephen of Blois; Stephen of Burgundy" -> "such as Counts Stephen of Blois and Stephen of Burgundy"
  • "fall in the battlefield." -> "fall on the battlefield."
  • "for unknown reason." -> "for unknown reasons."
  • "approaches the Pope" -> "approaches the Pope,"
  • "whom he regards" -> ", whom he regards"
  • "on Baldwin I's request" -> "at Baldwin I's request"
  • "Venetian fleet defeat the Fatimid navy." -> "Venetian fleet defeats the Fatimid navy."
  • "Ilghazi son's, Timurtash" -> "Ilghazi's son, Timurtash"
  • "not sanctioned as a crucade" -> "not sanctioned as a crusade"
  • "control ofAleppo." -> "control of Aleppo."
  • "general assembly to Nablus" -> "general assembly in Nablus"
  • "New embassy is sent" -> "A new embassy is sent"
  • "The senechal, Miles of Plancy" -> "The seneschal, Miles of Plancy"
  • "as senechal and arranges" -> "as seneschal and arranges"
  • "St Amand" -> "St. Amand"
  • "Guy pillages a Beduin tribe" -> "Guy pillages a Bedouin tribe"
  • "between Sybilla and Isabella's claims" -> "between Sybilla's and Isabella's claims"
  • "the hands of his sister," -> "the hand of his sister,"
Second kingdom
edit
  • "Beduins attack pilgrims" -> "Bedouins attack pilgrims"
  • "He march to Tyre" -> "He marches to Tyre"
  • "Galilee and the hinterland of Jaffa is restored" -> "Galilee and the hinterland of Jaffa are restored"
  • "Richard leave for England." -> "Richard leaves for England."
  • "internal strifes in the kingdom." -> "internal strife in the kingdom."
General comments
edit
  • The article is very long, should it be split?
Reducing by 15% would be beneficial. @Borsoka History6042😊 (Contact me) 20:57, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please ping me when everything is done. History6042😊 (Contact me) 12:56, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@History6042: I reduced the list by 15% ([1]), and fixed all problems you indicated above. Please let me know if any further action is needed to improve the list. Borsoka (talk) 03:06, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Drive-by

edit
  • I see no reason why there should be pseudo-headers when h4's can be used and a {{TOC limit}} can be thrown down. Is there any reason why you chose to use pseudo-headers? Cowboygilbert - (talk) ♥ 18:41, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Sorry, I cannot understand your above message. What is a pseudo-header, h4's and why is {{TOC limit}} better? Borsoka (talk) 01:02, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @Borsoka: Pseudo-headers are headers that are not section headers, this is using boldface or descriptive list formatting. Per MOS:PSEUDOHEAD, you must stray away from using pseudo-headers on the basis of accessibilities. H4 is HTML talk for level 4 section headers (using four equal signs like ====). {{TOC limit}} is to limit the TOC so you don't see section headers on the article in the TOC. You should only do 2-whatever number. Never, ever, ever limit to level 1 (which is the name of the article). An article that uses TOC limit is Huaynaputina which is using {{TOC limit|2}} to hide the section headers. My suggestion was to change all the bold-face pseudo-headers into level 4 section headers and slapping a {{TOC limit|3}} after the lead of the article. You'll also have to break up Timeline of the Kingdom of Jerusalem#Background into different sections as well. (please ping when replying, I wont see it otherwise) Thanks, Cowboygilbert - (talk) ♥ 21:46, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @Cowboygilbert:, thank you for your answer. The list is fully in line with the policy you mentioned above: "Do not create pseudo-headings by misusing semicolon markup (;), which is reserved for description lists, and avoid using bold text for headings." 1. I did not use semicolon markup (;) to create pseudo-headings; 2. and did not use bold text for headings. My solution (using level 2 and 3 for sections and sub-sections, and bold text for pseudo-headings) is presented as an acceptable option by MOS:PSEUDOHEAD. Borsoka (talk) 01:40, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @Borsoka: Except you forgot to read However, pseudo-headings should be used only as a last resort. You are able to use and should use {{TOC limit}} but are not wanting to. Using pseudo-headers by the TEXT of the policy, not the graphic, should only be used if you have lower level headers elsewhere in the article but this isn't the case. You are able to use h4s and hide them using TOC limit. Thank you, Cowboygilbert - (talk) ♥ 03:51, 19 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @Cowboygilbert: again, my solution is presented as an acceptable option by MOS:PSEUDOHEAD. I think the use of h4s (often for "sections" containing one sentence) would not improve the list. Borsoka (talk) 03:57, 19 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @Borsoka I mean, if you want to WP:IAR then go ahead but you should re-read MOS:PSEUDOHEAD. When {{TOC limit}} cannot be used due to lower-level headings elsewhere in the article, using bold text for sub-sub-sub headings is the least disruptive alternative for screen readers. is the part I was mentioning. But, if you want to act like that part doesn't exist then go ahead. Cowboygilbert - (talk) ♥ 03:59, 19 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    No, I act fully in accordance with the option presented as acceptable by MOS:PSEUDOHEAD: pseudo-headings instead of level 4 subsections. Borsoka (talk) 04:03, 19 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Generalissima

edit

Source review:

  • Consistent use of SFNs, nice.
  • Hardwicke 1969, Baldwin 1969, Nicholson 1969, and Prawer 1998 use a different ISBN style than the other sources; these should be consistent.
  • Lock 2006 is hyphenated incorrectly; should be 978-0-415-39312-6
    Done.
  • Inconsistent use of "the" before a university press's name - i'd recommend dropping it from all the publisher names.
    Done.
  • Crusade Texts in Translation is linked, but none of the other books are given a book series. It seems like a good proportion of academic published books are in a series; have you checked for consistency here? I took a random sample and MacEvitt 2008 is in a series (The Middle Ages Series) and Jotischky 2017 is in a series (Recovering the Past).
  • Typo in MacEvitt 2008's title
    Done.
  • Internet History Sourcebooks Project should be linked as the publisher (also it's Sourcebook, not Source Book)
    Done.
  • To be consistent with other cites, William of Tyre should be linked and Baha ad-Din ibn Shaddad should be put in the author field and linked for his book.
  • Footnote C isn't cited.
    Done. Borsoka (talk) 18:04, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sources are all appropriately high quality.

Spot check to come.

Thank you for starting the review. I will address the pending issues tomorrow. Borsoka (talk) 18:04, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_list_candidates/Timeline_of_the_Kingdom_of_Jerusalem/archive2&oldid=1282972747"