Talk:1632 Polish–Lithuanian royal election

GA Review

The article is too short, and is incomplete, and therefore does not meet the completeness criterion at WP:WIAGA. Not only is the lead section too short, and doesn't adequately summarize the article (see WP:LEAD for tips on improving this section), but its main sections and content is very short as well. The article also doesn't follow the manual of style too well. It would help to review that, in particular the section regarding section headers (WP:MSH). A photo or photo(s) could also help the article as well. Dr. Cash (talk) 18:00, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

I will expand the lead and fix the headings, but your other comments hold no water. The main body of the article is very comprehensive - point me to other sources that could be used to expand it, please. I believe that this article is one of the most comprehensive descriptions of the Sejm of 1632, in English or Polish. As for the photo... 17th century? You are not serious, are you? :) --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 23:51, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Election sejm of 1632/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Good article nomination on hold

This article's Good Article promotion has been put on hold. During review, some issues were discovered that can be resolved without a major re-write. This is how the article, as of June 25, 2008, compares against the six good article criteria:

1. Well written?: Fail

• There are a number of grammatical errors present throughout the article, and it requires a good copyedit. Specific instances include:

the non-Catholics led by marshal Radziwiłł and Bogusław Leszczyński) demanded increased rights of the non-Catholics - repetition of non-catholics, needs to be re-written, also marshal should be capitalized.

his candidature was never officially put forth - 'put forward

His apparent religiously tolerant attitude - needs to be reworded

On the international scene - Needs to be reworded

papal nuncio - capitlization

count - needs to be capitalized

although the envoy of Gustavus (Steno Belke[5]) argued that Władysław should renounce his claim to the Swedish throne[6] (Władysław refused). - Rewrite to avoid the brackets

The Sejm of 1632, taking place at Wola (as was traditional) - Same as above

Regarding copyedit, I am not a native English speaker but I have requested copyedit help from some users I know specialize in this area.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 22:53, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

2. Factually accurate?: Fail

• A number of factual errors present in the article, including:

Lead requires expansion, and does not adequately explain the article in summation

I am really not sure what needs to be added to lead, it is short - yes - but seems to summarize all that's relevant.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 22:53, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Dates need to be wikilinked

A number of people mentioned do not have titles or explanation as as to who they are, such as Bogusław Leszczyński, Tomasz Zamoyski and Aleksander Trzebiński.

Added short explanations.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 22:53, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

interrex - what is this? It may be wikilinked, but a brief exlanation is in order.

Explained.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 22:53, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

The convocation sejm - Same for this

It is explained (a type of sejm that preceeded every election sejm).--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 22:53, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Jan Kazimierz was further disadvantaged as he was the younger son, and king Zygmunt III Waza, father of Władysław and Zygmunt, before his death (on April 30) blessed Władysław and chose him as his successor - Needs to be split into two sentences, with an explanation as why being the younger son was a disadvantage, and what advantage the King's blessing had.

he indecisiveness of the Catholic faction - How were they indecisive?

Similarly, Władysław breaking custom and coming to Warsaw during the election generated only a little disapproval. - Why did this break custom? What custom? Why did it generate little disapproval?

of the Swedish Vasas - what is the Vasas - a governing body?

although the envoy of Gustavus (Steno Belke[5]) argued that Władysław should renounce his claim to the Swedish throne[6] (Władysław refused). - what was their argument?

You aso fail to explain why and how al of these nations were able to field candidates in this election, which has already confused me.

The religious freedoms from the Warsaw Confederation were reaffirmed, and a new tax was passed, kwarta, which sent 40% of starostwo's income to the Royal Treasury- why is the later important, and what is a kwarta? A short explanation would be in order.

In the pacta conventa, Władysław promised to fund a military school and equipment, find a way to fund a naval fleet, maintain current alliances, not to raise armies, give offices or military ranks to foreigners, negotiate peace treaties or declare war without Sejm's approval, not to take a wife without the Senate's approval, convince his brothers to take an oath to the Commonwealth, and transfer the profits from the Royal Mint to the Royal (not private) Treasury.[6] - Needs to be broekn down with proper punctuation and also rewritten to avoid the brackets.

He was crowned on February 5, 1633 (the ceremony continued over the next day). - rewrite to remove brackets.

References - these should not be combined as they are - page numbers and abbreviated title should be in a Notes section, the rest of the information in the References Section.

3. Broad in coverage?: Fail

• Does not explain what an election sejm actually is. Even the wikilink fails to do so, and this article should at least provide an overview of what a sejm actually was.
• Fails to mention why the issue of catholicism was such a contentious issue - thus, the Prelude needs an expansion and revamp to explain this to the reader.
• Fails to explain in detail many of the wikilinked names and organizations and titles, which will confuse the general reader.

4. Neutral point of view?: Pass

• No problems here

5. Article stability? Pass

• No editwars, so a pass

6. Images?: Pass

• Not required, but at the very least a picture of Władysław IV Vasa would be good for the article.

Please address these matters soon and then leave a note here showing how they have been resolved. After 48 hours the article should be reviewed again. If these issues are not addressed within 7 days, the article may be failed without further notice. Thank you for your work so far. Skinny87 (talk) 17:13, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

I have failed this article, as eight days have passed and litle work has been done. Please renom at a later time. Skinny87 (talk) 15:15, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Unfortunately I've been rather busy in RL recently, so I have a backlog of wiki issues to address. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 22:45, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

B-class review

I found a couple of issues that need to be addressed before the article can be promoted to B class:

Consistency

• Sigismund vs. Zygmunt
• Date format (dd MMMM yyyy vs. MMMM dd, yyyy)

Prelude

• "Sudden heart attack that Sigismund suffered on 23 April 1632, and his death in the morning hours of 30 April, forced the issue to be taken up again." Sentence is awkward

Election

• "metropolies" Are these metropolitans?
• "At least 3,543 votes have been cast for Władysław." were cast
• "When the election result had been announced ..." were announced

Overall, a very interesting article. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 04:03, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Saw your review, chipping in with a bit of copy-editing and an extra point here and there. PЄTЄRS J V ►TALK 06:59, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

I think that mine ans Peters edits addressed those issues (thanks, Peters!). --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk to me} 19:06, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Thank you both (and Volunteer Marek) for the improvements. Promoted to B class. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 03:54, 1 November 2011 (UTC)