Template:Did you know nominations/Vrana Konti

Vrana Konti

 * ... that Vrana rejected the offer of great wealth and a high officer rank by the Ottomans during the Siege of Krujë?
 * Reviewed: Hélène van Zuylen

Created/expanded by Zoupan (talk). Self nom at 16:54, 29 April 2012 (UTC)


 * You added many outdated sources.-- — ZjarriRrethues —  talk 18:59, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Are they unreliable, and if, which ones and in which way? Elaborate.--Z oupan 19:32, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

ALT1: ... that Skanderbeg's general Count Vrana refused 300,000 silver aspra and a high army rank, offered by the Ottoman Empire for his surrender during the Siege of Krujë (1450)? JJB 01:18, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Need a new reviewer; the original one has not responded for 12 days despite being online in that period. BlueMoonset (talk) 19:23, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Symbol question.svg "Vrana" is a dab page, need to change hook. Article might need moving to "Vrana Altisferi" as "Konti" is a title. The last sentence of the lead does not recur in article and is not sourced, and it would be important to have scholarly commentary to separate legend from history here. Are "Vlladan" and "Vladan" in same graf correct? Battle section is tagged as too long, how to fix? I'd also need to review how much the battle and sieges copy from the articles summarized and whether this is a fail. Annotations have some redundancy and one questioned source. Hook statement (and my ALT1) need a source conformity check; also lead version of hook is poorly stated. This is just to get started, there might be more needs.
 * Summary: Easily fivefold expansion, and long enough; slight NPOV questions and larger questions about lack of clarity; AGF QPQ; no images; hook definitely needs work, alt below. JJB 01:18, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
 * A move to "Count Vrana" maybe? I removed the romantical last sentence of the intro. Yes, the ref says "Vlladan Grivici" and "Vladan Jurica". The Battle-section is summarized, though it may need some shortening. I support ALT1. I'll try to find more sources on this person.--Z oupan 15:53, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I don't see what moving "Vrana Konti" to "Count Vrana" buys you; it's the same title, only translated. If the common name (Vrana Konti) is not appropriate because it's more of a title than truly common (MOS:LEDE might give good guidance), then the actual name (Vrana Altisferi) would seem to be the best choice. BlueMoonset (talk) 19:39, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
 * According to Naming conventions (people): The name used most often to refer to a person in reliable sources is generally the one that should be used as the article title, even if it is not their "real" name.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 20:18, 13 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Symbol confirmed.svg No need to move, I was misreading MOS:LEDE, but title is compliant with WP:NCROY and WP:UCN per Google. But for our en.audience, I'd still use "Count Vrana" rather than "Vrana Konti" in hook. About 4 sources prior to 20th century don't bother me. Policy compliance good now, I did a little work there. ALT1 correct length, good content.
 * Symbol question.svg If the hook source can be quoted in the footnote, or if there is some AGF reason not to, that would be great. It would be important to know the original version of the text that became this hook as far as possible. After this is settled and ALT1 resolved, I or any other editor can mark it good to go. JJB 20:35, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
 * No, I was not the one who approved ALT1; I don't believe it has been approved. The original author of the article, Zoupon, gave support to ALT1 just above my separate comment. ALT1 still needs an independent review by someone (and the "(1450)" needs to be obscured using a piped link), and the final tick should also depend on that review. I do agree that "Count Vrana" should be used in the hook (but with the piped link to Vrana Konti) for the reason JJB gives. BlueMoonset (talk) 20:47, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks, refactored. What a page for detail types! (1450) was intentional for guidance but can also be piped, and Count Vrana piped as well. Yeah, I guess WP:DYK1P#B3 means wait on the hook too. JJB 20:56, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Symbol question.svg All but one fact in the ALT1 hook has an inline citation to support it. The fact that Vrana was a general, and not just a general at some point (which is mentioned in the lede), but had that rank at the time he was offered the 300,000 aspra during the Siege of Krujë, needs to be mentioned in the article and with a supporting cite. He's referred to as a commander in various places and in charge of contingents of forces, and as leading the garrison during the siege, but that isn't the same thing. (You could change "general" to "commander" in the hook, of course, though "general" is more "hooky".) There is also the "need quote to verify" notation at the end of the sentence that details the 300K offer, which would seem to lend doubt to the footnotes that precede it. Is the information in the source or not? (This also applies to the original, less interesting hook.) What is actually needed here, and why? BlueMoonset (talk) 04:11, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I would pass it based on your reading of citations and on the fact that the hook doesn't literally say he was a general in 1450. I would also pass it changing the hook to "commander". The alternative is to get the quote itself. In any of those cases we delete my tag, have someone approve my hook, and go. If we count "commander" as your ALT2 and I approve your ALT2 that might also make us ready to go. Let's try that boldly. JJB 15:54, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

ALT2 by BlueMoonset above JJB: "... that Skanderbeg's commander Count Vrana refused 300,000 silver aspra and a high army rank, offered by the Ottoman Empire for his surrender during the Siege of Krujë (1450)?
 * Symbol confirmed.svg with ALT2 per rationale above. Pass? JJB 15:54, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Symbol question.svg You may not assign an ALT to me that I have not written, nor turn around and pass it yourself after you created it. You have boldly stepped over the line. As you wrote ALT2, it is yours, and you'll need to find an uninvolved party to approve it for it to proceed. I will point out that you have failed to include the piped links discussed above, and should do so before finding a new hook reviewer. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:58, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Sorry for any presumptiveness in my streamline attempt to answer your question "what is needed". I also thought pipes were resolved. JJB 17:30, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
 * ALT3: "... that Vrana Konti refused a bribe offered by Ottoman sultan Murad II for his surrender during the Siege of Krujë?"
 * Explanation: The article presents Vrana as a Napolitan nobleman who received the title of conte (count) by King of Naples, Alfonso the Magnanimous. Even before Skanderbeg became Napolitan vassal (by signing the Treaty of Gaeta in 1451) he was at least under significant Alfonso's influence. The hook should be NPOV and avoid any potential dispute. Therefore it is probably better to avoid stating whose commander Vrana was, Skanderbeg's or Napolitan. Amount of 300,000 silver aspra and high army rank does not have a quote to support it. Source says that it was sultan Murad II who tried to bribe Vrana, not the whole Ottoman Empire.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 17:22, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Fine, much less hooky, but I'll approve that just to get it out the door. Quote is in article, pipes are appropriate, nothing else necessary. JJB 17:30, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
 * ALT3 might be hookier if it was flipped (see below as ALT4), and it would be nice in any case to get Zoupon's buy-in of these later ALTs before final approval:
 * ALT4: ... that Count Vrana refused to surrender during the Siege of Krujë despite a bribe offered to him by Ottoman sultan Murad II? —BlueMoonset (talk) 17:58, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes, that one's fine too, better than ALT3. JJB 18:05, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes, much better, thanks BlueMoonset. --Antidiskriminator (talk) 18:59, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
 * 3rd Yes. Go.--Z oupan 22:07, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Great. JJB, do you want to supply the necessary tick to close this up, and strike out any hooks above you don't want to be grabbed by the person who promotes this? Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 22:11, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

OK. Conditions met. ALT4 it is. JJB 01:41, 17 May 2012 (UTC)