Talk:Grand Duchy of Tuscany

Coat of Arms
I found the coat of arms of Grand Duke Leopold I on Commons. (Jack1755 (talk) 15:24, 20 May 2009 (UTC))

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Hello! I will be reviewing this article for possible GA status. I will be taking great care during this GA Review, so please be patient. Thanks! Monsieur dl   mon talk 21:14, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

GA Review summary
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria


 * 1) Is it reasonably well written?
 * A. Prose quality:
 * B. MoS compliance:
 * 1) Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
 * A. References to sources:
 * B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
 * C. No original research:
 * 1) Is it broad in its coverage?
 * A. Major aspects:
 * B. Focused:
 * 1) Is it neutral?
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * No edit wars, etc:
 * 1) Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
 * A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
 * B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * No edit wars, etc:
 * 1) Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
 * A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
 * B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * Pass or Fail:

Although I failed it due to a large amount of prose problems and sourcing issues, I will still be noting more corrections that need to be made- I can't simply just stop here. This article can be GA with the proper changes in time. Monsieur dl   mon talk 23:55, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Infobox

 * Remove the parentheses for both dates at the top of the infobox.
 * "Megred to form the United Provinces of Central Italy" should be merged.

Lead

 * Main articles should be consolidated into one line, not each one having their own dedicated line.


 * This sentence in the lead is very long and quite confusing: "The grand duchy consisted of most of the territory of the current Italian region of Tuscany, with the exception of the northernmost portions, which formed the Duchy of Massa, the Principality of Carrara, the cities of Orbetello, Porto Ercole, Porto Santo Stefano, Talamone, Ansedonia and Porto Longone, which formed the State of Presidi (up to 1815), and the Republic and then the Duchy of Lucca (up to 1847)." An exception, then formed, and then which formed- I got lost easily.
 * Fixed -- Jack1755 (talk) 16:25, 9 November 2009 (UTC)


 * The ending of the first paragraph in the lead is choppy and needs to be revised- "The grand duchy's capital was Florence. Until the advent of the House of Lorraine, Tuscany was a Spanish fief. It was a state of the Holy Roman Empire until the Peace of Westphalia in 1648." 'It' is not a good way to begin a sentence.
 * Fixed, but does it say that in the MOS? -- Jack1755 (talk) 16:25, 9 November 2009 (UTC)


 * The end of the second paragraph in the lead, "Under the Medici, Tuscany thrived, while not as internationally renowned as the old republic, it beared witness to unprecedented economic and military success under Cosimo I, under whom Tuscany acquired Elba, and his sons, until the reign of Ferdinando II, which saw the beginning of the state’s long economic decline.", is a run-on express with too many commas- it needs revision to break it up.
 * Fixed. -- Jack1755 (talk) 16:25, 9 November 2009 (UTC)


 * The Montesquieu quote is poorly placed; I would recommend that it be removed, or beefed up with some correlation between Montesquieu, Florence, and the Grand Duchy.
 * Fixed. -- Jack1755 (talk) 16:25, 9 November 2009 (UTC)


 * These two sentences needs to be combined and revised- "The Medici’s only advancement in the latter days of their existence was their elevation to royalty, by the Holy Roman Emperor, in 1691. They went extinct in 1737."


 * "Francis Stephen of Lorraine ascended the throne." OK, so when did this happen? What is it in reference to? It sits out there on an island...
 * Fixed. -- Jack1755 (talk) 16:25, 9 November 2009 (UTC)


 * "bar one interruption" should be barring one interruption.
 * Fixed. -- Jack1755 (talk) 16:25, 9 November 2009 (UTC)


 * "(He annexed it to France in 1807, and was restored to the Habsburg-Lorraines in 1815.)" is too much for parentheses- find a way to make it an actual sentence.
 * Fixed. -- Jack1755 (talk) 16:25, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Main article

 * Get rid of the parentheses that really take away from the writing, and weave them into your sentences.


 * Foundation, paragraph 2: "Cosimo instigated naval reforms" shouldn't be halted by a semicolon.
 * Fixed. -- Jack1755 (talk) 16:42, 9 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Foundation, paragraph 2: "which were unknown to his time." His time should not be the subject- use during his time.
 * Fixed. -- Jack1755 (talk) 16:42, 9 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Foundation, paragraph 3: "And Cosimo's relative"- NEVER begin a sentence with and.
 * Ok, fixed. -- Jack1755 (talk) 16:42, 9 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Foundation, paragraph 3: ''"by Catholic reckoning England had devolved on the Papacy"- 'England had devolved on' makes no sense at all using 'on'.
 * Fixed. -- Jack1755 (talk) 16:42, 9 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Foundation, paragraph 5: "four of his children, due to a plague"- remove the comma.
 * Fixed. -- Jack1755 (talk) 16:42, 9 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Francesco and Ferdinando I, paragraph 1: "Administration was delegated to bureaucrats."- too short of a sentence; needs beefing up.
 * Done. -- Jack1755 (talk) 16:42, 9 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Francesco and Ferdinando I, paragraph 2: "Southern Tuscany and cultivated"- need a comma between Tuscany and the and.
 * Fixed. -- Jack1755 (talk) 16:42, 9 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Francesco and Ferdinando I, paragraph 2: "Franco-Tucan alliance" should be Tuscan alliance.
 * Fixed. -- Jack1755 (talk) 16:42, 9 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Francesco and Ferdinando I, paragraph 2: "with the inention of establishing"- "inention" should be intention.
 * Fixed. -- Jack1755 (talk) 16:42, 9 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Francesco and Ferdinando I, paragraph 2: "Rome, Milan, Venice, Palermo and Naples."- ALL need to be wikilinked.
 * Well, according to WP:Linking, "the names of major geographic features and locations" shouldn't be linked. -- Jack1755 (talk) 16:42, 9 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Francesco and Ferdinando I, paragraph 3: "Ferdindando, despite no longer being a cardinal, exercised much influence at successive conclaves."- What is an enclave? How is it relevant?
 * I elaborated. -- Jack1755 (talk) 16:42, 9 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Francesco and Ferdinando I, paragraph 3: Medici, elected Pope Clement XI."- should be elected as Pope Clement XI.''
 * Fixed. -- Jack1755 (talk) 16:42, 9 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Francesco and Ferdinando I, paragraph 3: "Alas, he died the same month, but his successor, Pope Paul V, was also pro-Medici."- I would revise this sentence; it doesn't flow right.
 * Fixed. -- Jack1755 (talk) 16:42, 9 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Francesco and Ferdinando I, paragraph 3: "Ferdinando died in 1609, leaving an affluent realm; however his inaction in international affairs drew Tuscany into the provincial yolk."- A comma after however is needed. 'into the provincial yolk' doesn't sound right- what kind of provincial yolk? It is law, taxes, bribery, salaries, what exactly?
 * Fixed. -- Jack1755 (talk) 16:42, 9 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Francesco and Ferdinando I, paragraph 3: "provincial yolk of policitcs"- politics is spelled wrong.
 * Fixed. Laurinavicius (talk) 00:44, 23 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Cosimo II and Ferdinando II, paragraph 1: "Maria Maddalena, and"- remove the comma.
 * Fixed. Laurinavicius (talk) 00:44, 23 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Cosimo II and Ferdinando II, paragraph 1: "government (proscribed by Cosimo I)."- remove the parentheses and make it a full sentence, and it is prescribed, unless you meant to say "Cosimo I had previously proscribed clergy from holding administrative roles in government, but Christina decided to lift the ban."
 * Fixed. Laurinavicius (talk) 00:44, 23 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Cosimo II and Ferdinando II, paragraph 1: "Tuscany participated in the Wars of Castro (the last time Medicean Tuscany proper was involved in a conflict) and inflicted a defeat on the forces of Urban VIII in 1643."- those pesky parentheses again!
 * Fixed. Laurinavicius (talk) 00:44, 23 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Cosimo II and Ferdinando II, paragraph 1: "The exchequer was barely adequate to cover the state's current expenditure. The remaining banking operations of the Medici were terminated too."- I would combine this sentence and use a also instead of too, or I would recommend something like "The exchequer was barely adequate to cover the state's current expenditure, resulting in a complete termination of banking operations for the Medici."
 * Fixed. Laurinavicius (talk) 00:44, 23 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Cosimo II and Ferdinando II, paragraph 1: "Ferdinando was obsessed with new technology, and had several hygrometers, barometers, thermometers, and telescopes installed in the Pitti."- I would wikilink these scientific instruments.
 * Fixed. Laurinavicius (talk) 00:44, 23 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Cosimo II and Ferdinando II, paragraph 1: "del Cimento; set up to"- use a comma vice a semicolon.
 * Fixed. Laurinavicius (talk) 00:44, 23 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Cosimo III, paragraph 1: "Cosimo III's reign was marked by a sharp conservative reaction."- A reaction to what? I know what you are getting at, but the general reader may get lost and wonder. The first sentence of a paragraph should be more in-depth so you know what it relates to.


 * Cosimo III, paragraph 1: "Tuscany's delcine"- should be spelled decline.
 * Fixed. Laurinavicius (talk) 02:21, 23 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Cosimo III, paragraph 1: "This union was exceedingly discontent." This is too short of a sentence and makes no sense the way it is worded. I suggest something like "Their union wrought a high level of discontentment, and despite the tension they had three children..."
 * Fixed. Laurinavicius (talk) 02:12, 23 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Cosimo III, paragraph 2: "forcing prostitutes to pay for licenses and beheading sodomites"- add a comma after licenses, because it sounds as if the prostitutes had to pay for beheading sodomites... LOL
 * Fixed. Laurinavicius (talk) 02:12, 23 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Cosimo III, paragraph 3: "The Tuscans had new anti-Semitic laws forced onto to them by the ever radical Cosimo III also, while the country's population as a whole continued to decline."- This sentence heeds help... remove the first to, and remove also,, giving you "Cosimo III while the".
 * Fixed. Laurinavicius (talk) 17:29, 29 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Cosimo III, paragraph 3: "virtually bankrupt and the population of Florence had declined by 50%, and the population of the grand duchy by an estimated 40%."- Place a comma after bankrupt, and after 50%.
 * Fixed. Laurinavicius (talk) 17:29, 29 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Cosimo III, paragraph 3: "The future of the dynasty itself painted a similar picture,"- replace the comma with a period.
 * Fixed. Laurinavicius (talk) 17:29, 29 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Cosimo III, paragraph 3: "to the grand duchy (through some Medici descent), fortunately for Tuscany, he died in 1711, but it was not to escape Imperial ambitions for much longer."- remove the parentheses and blend in the descent, and place a period after. The fortunately is not appropriate for this article; it smacks of opinion and is WP:NPOV.
 * Fixed. Laurinavicius (talk) 17:29, 29 November 2009 (UTC)


 * The last years of the Medici, paragraph 1: "Gian Gastone" needs to be wikilinked.
 * Fixed. Laurinavicius (talk) 17:29, 29 November 2009 (UTC)


 * The last years of the Medici, paragraph 1: "At times they had him for dead. Gian Gastone would repeal his father's puritan laws"- The first short sentence hangs out there, so find a way to make it work with the beginning without making it too long; I'd split it up. The second sentence is also a bit too short, so add a little to it.
 * Fixed. Laurinavicius (talk) 17:29, 29 November 2009 (UTC)


 * The last years of the Medici, paragraph 1: "closest male relative's" should be relative, as the Prince of Otranto's establishes the possession of the claim.
 * Fixed. Laurinavicius (talk) 17:29, 29 November 2009 (UTC)


 * The last years of the Medici, paragraph 1: "in Florence, in of 1735, by the"- remove both commas and the of.
 * Fixed. Laurinavicius (talk) 17:29, 29 November 2009 (UTC)


 * The last years of the Medici, paragraph 1: "Francis Stephan of Lorraine became heir to the Tuscan throne."- put Soon after, before this sentence so it doesn't hang out there like a tidbit of trivia.
 * Fixed. Laurinavicius (talk) 17:29, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Infobox

 * Reference [2] should be at the end of the population, not after the year, for both are being sourced, not just the year.
 * The infobox won't allow it. -- Jack1755 (talk) 16:43, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I fixed this one myself- the infobox itself doesn't allow inline references with numeric data; I had to use the footnotes value.  Monsieur dl    mon talk 19:56, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Article

 * Reference [4] is not properly sourced according to proper inline citation format.


 * Foundation, paragraph 1 needs two citations- especially for Highness and the proclamation of Duke by his alleged father. Also, some information about this parental connection would be nice- alleged is a bad word to use anyways without sourcing.


 * Francesco and Ferdinando I, paragraph 1: "Francesco is best remembered for dying the same day as his second wife, Bianca Cappello, spurring forth rumours of poisoning. He was succeeded by Ferdinando de' Medici, his younger brother whom he loathed."- both need to be sourced.
 * Done. Laurinavicius (talk) 15:36, 31 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Francesco and Ferdinando I, paragraph 2: "Ferdinando eagerly assumed the government of Tuscany."- needs to be sourced.
 * Done. Laurinavicius (talk) 15:45, 31 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Francesco and Ferdinando I, paragraph 2: "Henry explicitly stated that he would defend Tuscany from Spanish aggression, but later reneged. Ferdinando was forced to marry his heir, Cosimo, to Maria Maddalena of Austria to assuage Spain (where Maria Maddalena's sister was the incumbent Queen consort)."- both sentences need to be sourced.
 * Done. Laurinavicius (talk) 16:12, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

Neutrality

 * Foundation, paragraph 4: "Cosimo's reign was one of the most militaristic Tuscany had ever seen." is not only unsourced, but violates WP:NPOV.
 * How do you know it violates NPOV? This might be the consensus view (or it might not, but you don't know that until we can get sources on the matter. john k (talk) 16:07, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Images

 * All of the images save one are positioned on the right hand side, detracting from the overall look of the article. I always recommend alternating locations in any article.


 * Cosimo I de Medici needs the artist in the description at the very least.


 * Ferdinando I needs the artist in the description at the very least and a wikilink for Ferdinando.


 * Maria Maddalena, Cosimo II and Ferdinando II, painting after Justus Sustermans mentions the artist, but the wording is poor. Wikilinks for all are needed as well.


 * Cosimo III needs the artist in the description at the very least and a wikilink for Cosimo.


 * A doppelportät of Franics Stephen and his wife Maria Theresa, by Peter Kobler von Ehrensorg needs no comma. Wikilinks for all are needed as well, including a word like doppelportät. The name should be Francis.


 * Grand Duke Leopold I with his children and wife, 1776 needs the artist in the description at the very least and a wikilink for Leopold I.


 * One of the Habsburg flags of Tuscany needs wikilinks.


 * Leopold II, Grand Duke of Tuscany (r. 1824-1859) in the uniform of an Austrian Field Marshal, 1828, after Pietro Benvenuti is perfect, save after which should be by. Note the format of this picture!

End date, Factual errors
Shouldn't the annexation by the Kingdom of Sardinia on March 22, 1860, be mentioned. I would say this, much more than whatever actions were taken by the de facto government in 1859, marks the end of the grand duchy. Until that point there was a very real possibility the grand duke would be restored, and most governments continued to accept his representatives as the legitimate diplomatic representatives of Tuscany. I believe, also, that foreign diplomats in Florence were still accredited to the grand duke, and not to the de facto government. I tend to think the end date should be March 22, 1860, not December 8, 1859.

Beyond that, the discussion of the end of the Grand Duchy is full of inaccuracies. An accurate description was actually removed and replaced with inaccurate information at some point. First, some sources on the Risorgimento that deal with this issue: Next, specific inaccuracies in the current version:
 * 1) Derek Beales & Eugenio F. Biagini, The Risorgimento and the Unification of Italy, 2nd ed. (London, 2002), 119-120 and 270-275
 * 2) Edgar Holt, The Making of Italy 1815-1870 (New York, 1971), 209-229.
 * 3) Bolton King, A History of Italian Unity, Vol. II, revised ed. (New York, 1924), 84-122
 * 4) George Martin, The Red Shirt and the Cross of Savoy (New York, 1969), 492-531.
 * 1) The war had not actually broken out yet when the revolution occurred in Florence. The revolution in Florence occurred on April 27.  As Holt says, this revolution "peacefully ejected Grand Duke Leopold II by means of a liberal coup d'état and an army mutiny." The Austrians did not cross the Ticino into Sardinian territory until April 29.   Furthermore, Leopold was not even planning to join the Austrians in the war.  As King says, he was "resolute in his policy of neutrality."  He was overthrown because he would not join in the war against Austria, not because he intended to fight on Austria's side.  So, point 1, Leopold did not support Austria in 1859 - he was not given a chance to because he was expelled before the war began, and he would not have anyway.
 * 2) Next, Victor Emmanuel did not "capture" Tuscany, and this did not cause Leopold's flight. Leopold, as we've seen, had already fled before any military action between Sardinia and Austria had begun, and fled to Mantua, in Austrian territory.  At that point, the provisional government in Florence offered Victor Emmanuel the dictatorship of Tuscany.  Victor Emmanuel refused the position, but accepted command of Tuscan troops; See Martin 498-499.  Per King 85-87, it was French troops, under Napoleon III's cousin Prince Napoleon, who came to Tuscany.  Victor Emmanuel did send a commissioner, General Boncompagni, to act as his representative in Florence, but I don't think its correct to say that Tuscany was occupied by Sardinian troops.
 * 3) Next, the peace of Villafranca did allow for the Grand Duke's return, but that return proved impossible in practice. Leopold was still in Austrian territory when he abdicated on July 21, ten days after Villafranca.  His son, Ferdinand IV, took up the claim, but like his father was unable to actually return to Florence.  The deposition of the family which occurred on August 16 was in absentia - the Habsburgs had been gone since April 27.

This all ought to be corrected. john k (talk) 16:49, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Garbled sentence
This has been brought up a couple of times in the GA review, but hasn't been addressed. This sentence is self-contradictory:

"Until the advent of the House of Lorraine, Tuscany was nominally a state of the Holy Roman Empire until the Peace of Westphalia in 1648.[2]"

I assume that by "advent of the House of Lorraine" the author meant the accession of Francis of Lorraine to the Tuscan (not that this is particularly clear). This happened in 1737, so the sentence seems to be saying that "Until 1737 Tuscany was nominally part of the HRE until 1648" which obviously doesn't make sense. Which is correct? My guess would be 1648 as the right date: the Peace of Westphalia did, I believe, formally remove jurisdiction of the HRE from N. Italy; meanwhile Francis was married to the Emperor's daughter, so it doesn't make sense that putting him in charge of the Grand Duchy would separate it from the Empire, does it? --Jfruh (talk) 18:40, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
 * The Peace of Westphalia did not formally remove imperial jurisdiction of Northern Italy. So far as I'm aware, it didn't address the issue at all.  I think that Northern Italy's status as being nominally part of the Empire, but without any real jurisdiction, basically continued until Napoleon's invasion.  Treaties from the eighteenth century regarding, for example, the succession to Modena, treat northern Italy as still being an imperial fief.  john k (talk) 20:19, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

Correct. Emperor Francis II formally relinquished all Imperial authority regarding the Kingdom of Italy via the Treaty of Campo Formio in 1797.

"Thus, the House of Medici had been raised to the rank of sovereigns"
I don't quite understand. This means that the Dukes of Florence were not sovereigns? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.241.63.102 (talk) 17:58, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Sunny side up?
I do not have a clue what is meant by this phrase: "his inaction in international affairs drew Tuscany into the provincial yolk of politics." Were the various Italian states throwing eggs at eachother? It doesn't make any more sense if you replace yolk with yoke. Could somebody who knows what this is about please word it more clearly? Chuntuk (talk) 10:47, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

European Map
The 1796 map does not accurately reflect the size of Prussia, Poland, Austria and possibly Russia after the second partition of Poland in 1793.

Nomination for deletion of Template:Grand Ducal Family of Tuscany
Template:Grand Ducal Family of Tuscany has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Bsherr (talk) 05:43, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

the provincial yolk of politics?
??? DlronW (talk) 20:30, 8 July 2023 (UTC)