Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Catherine de' Medici's building projects

The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted 15:47, 5 April 2008.

---

Catherine de' Medici's building projects

I'm nominating this article for featured status because I believe it meets the criteria. The article has been tricky, in some ways, because it is largely about buildings that were never completed or which have since been knocked down. It has received a thorough review (someone called the peer review "exemplary") both at its peer review and on the article's talk page (many thanks to User: Carcharoth, User: Awadewit, User: D. Recorder, and User: Scartol for investing their time and care). qp10qp (talk) 18:52, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Comments

• (Just a suggestion) Might you put the notes and references into two columns to make it a bit easier to read.

Link tool shows no problems with the links, and I didn't find any either. Sources look good. Ealdgyth - Talk 21:31, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Notes and refs in two columns. qp10qp (talk) 23:13, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Thankee! Ealdgyth - Talk 23:16, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Provisional support. Lovely article, and nice things about the writing, but it needs a little fixing from time to time. I easily found these in the lead, and the rest is similar.

• "wasn't"—see MOS.

Fixed. This is the only thing of this type that I can find. No idea how it slipped through. qp10qp (talk) 13:04, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

• "During the same period, however, religious civil war gripped the country and brought the prestige of the monarchy to a dangerously low ebb." Second "however" in a short space, this time differently placed in the clause complex. There's another soon after. Why not "Ironically, during the same .."?

Fixed the "however" cluster". Checked for others. qp10qp (talk)

• "often damaged or incomplete"—refers to the museums and churches, or the sculptures? TONY (talk) 11:13, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Reordered sentence. qp10qp (talk) 13:04, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

I know you've heard this a thousand times before, but I can't act on "the rest is similar". I've redrafted this many times and tried to write an elegant prose which is at the same time, for a complex subject, relatively simple to read. If problems remain in the prose, I am blind to them, I'm afraid. qp10qp (talk) 13:02, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Even so, I have just gone through the article looking for any potential miscues similar to the last one on your list. I have made a few changes (please have a glance at the diffs), but the majority of the sentences are simply constructed, and, in my opinion, should present no problem. qp10qp (talk) 14:05, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

• Support. The only suggestion I have is that I would make Montceaux the first project that the article mentions, as it was the first. Karanacs (talk) 19:50, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

I wanted to start with the influence of the death of Henry II on Catherine's works, deal with sculpture, and then proceed through individual architects. Montceaux does rather stand out, I admit, but I think it goes well before the section on the Tuileries, because the architect, de l'Orme, was the same. And since it was given to Catherine by Henry, I thought it would provide a transition between the memorial work and the residential work. Many thanks for taking the trouble to read and review the article. qp10qp (talk) 18:01, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

• Support - Lovely article! An exhaustively researched, well-written and well-illustrated article. A pleasure to read! My only question is: Why is the poem in italics? Is it that way in the original? Awadewit (talk) 11:37, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

I've changed that now. Danny was going round putting poetry in italics, and I must have thought I'd missed a policy. I now realise it's something to do with how he likes things to look on Veropedia. qp10qp (talk)

That's annoying - if that is not how it is printed, why change it? I'll email him. :) Awadewit (talk) 18:21, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

To be clear, I did it, not Danny. I had seen him do it elsewhere, as on Anne of Denmark [1], and followed suit. qp10qp (talk) 18:30, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

• Support: Really, really, nice work. Tight and engaging writing, fine illustrations (though I would left-align the effigies and Resurrection fragments images), faultless referencing, and well, just great overall. As a trivial matter should Catherine de' Medici be linked in the body text rather than in just an image caption? Ceoil (talk) 21:54, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

I did have them left aligned, but someone at peer review said they were excrescing their sections. I'd like to have those images at the left top of sections, but I don't think they moor there very well on some screens. Many thanks for taking the trouble to read and comment. Catherine now linked appropriately. qp10qp (talk) 01:27, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.