Wikipedia:Peer review/Raymond III, Count of Tripoli/archive1

Raymond III, Count of Tripoli

I've listed this article for peer review because it may need significant improvements before nominating it as a FAC. As Raymond was a controversial figure just before the crusaders' catastophic defeat at Hattin by Saladin, I think neutrality can be a potential problem. Thank you for your time.

Thanks, Borsoka (talk) 04:45, 10 March 2023 (UTC)

Comments from Tim riley

A first perusal reveals a mixture of English and American spellings. Among the former are defence (twice), neighbouring, organise and rumours, and among the latter, advisor (twice), defenseless, favor (twice) and jewelry. Before going to FAC you need to standardise on one or the other: either is fine, but a mixture is not. The above are the spellings I spotted, but I recommend you check the whole text for other inconsistencies. I'm sure I don't need to add that my comments refer only to the main text, and that quotations should remain in the original spellings whether BrE or AmE.

I noticed a large number of "however"s in the text – fourteen, I think (two in one paragraph). The word is seldom necessary, and often impedes the flow of the prose. I suggest you remove as many as you can. For instance, in "the enemy forces, however, seriously outnumbered their retinue" and "His praise was tempered with criticism, however", the howevers add nothing of value and would be better removed. There are even more "also"s in the text, and a fair few of them could advantageously be removed.

You mention your concern about neutrality. I got no impression that it was a problem on my first read-through, but will reread and comment further. Tim riley talk 12:17, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

After a second reading I can still detect no sign of bias, and to my mind the article appears impeccably neutral. It seemed a trifle long, and if it is possible to trim it a little that would be a good thing, I think, though I know how hard it is to prune one's own prose. Other reviewers may have thoughts on this point. That apart, I can't think of any suggestions for improving the article, which strikes me as pretty much ready for FAC. – Tim riley talk 16:24, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for your review. I hope I could address most problems you raised above. Borsoka (talk) 04:02, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

Standard note

I have added this PR to the Template:FAC peer review sidebar to get quicker and more responses. When this PR is closed, please remove it from the list. Also, consider adding the sidebar to your userpage to help others discover pre-FAC PRs, and please review other articles in that template. Thanks! Z1720 (talk) 01:40, 2 April 2023 (UTC)

@Borsoka: It has been over a month since the last comment. Are you still interested in receiving feedback, or can this be closed? Z1720 (talk) 17:22, 29 April 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for your note. I will close it in a couple of weeks. Borsoka (talk) 17:24, 29 April 2023 (UTC)

@Borsoka: Hold that thought! I will review this over the next few days. Unlimitedlead (talk) 19:53, 13 May 2023 (UTC)

Comments from Unlimitedlead

Soon. Unlimitedlead (talk) 19:53, 13 May 2023 (UTC)

• "Raymond and Bohemond III of Antioch sought to diminish the influence of the king's mother, Agnes of Courtenay..." This sentence implied to me that Agnes was the mother of Raymond.

• Done.

• Why is there no mention of Raymond's legacy in the lead? It would be nice for some of the lead to be excised in favor of that.

• Expanded.

• Duplicate link(s): Aleppo; Jordan River

• Both delined.

• ALT for the lead image?

• Done.

• I also think the lead image's caption could be a bit more descriptive. Perhaps it could detail where the depiction came from?

• Done.

• Can File:Saladin 1190 mint of Mayyafariqin.jpg be substituted with a more visually appealing option? I am sure Commons has many high-quality images of coins minted under Saladin.

• Changed, but only slightly better versions exist. Borsoka (talk) 01:44, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

• I personally do not care, but some reviewers at FA would point out that some ISBNs are 10-digit, whereas others are 13.

• I prefer the use the ISBN as it is printed on the books cited.

More to follow. Unlimitedlead (talk) 23:27, 14 May 2023 (UTC) Minority

• Knights Hospitaller is not linked in the body.

• Done.

• Link regency?

• Done.

• "The first extant document that he witnessed in the royal capital was issued..." The royal capital of Jerusalem?

• Clarified.

• Is it possible to disperse citations throughout this section? I feel a little uncomfortable with only one at the end.

• I think it is unnecessary: it is a short section.

First years of majority

• "...join the decimated royal army.k After their arrival..." There is some formatting error here.

• Fixed.

• Link Constantinople?

• Done.

More to follow. Unlimitedlead (talk) 13:15, 15 May 2023 (UTC) Captivity

• Introduce William of Tyre.

• Done.

• Ditto with Ali ibn al-Athir.

• Done.

More to follow. Unlimitedlead (talk) 17:31, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

• Thank you for your review and spots. Borsoka (talk) 01:41, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

First regency

• "...enabling him to seize a large fief in the kingdom": What kingdom? At first I thought you were talking about Galilee but that is a principality/

• Done.

• "...laid claim to the regency. He argued that he was the closest male relative and the most powerful vassal of the child king": I think this can all be combined into something like "...laid claim to the regency on the grounds that he was the closest male relative and the most powerful vassal of the child king".

• Done.

• "Raymond and Bohemond III of Antioch sought to diminish the influence of the ailing Baldwin's mother, Agnes of Courtenay":I did not recieve this indication from the text; rather I am confused by statements such as "He allowed the king's mother Agnes of Courtenay to return to the royal court, enabling her to strengthen her influence on the young monarch".

• The last part deleted.

• Also, you have not stated that Agnes was banished from the royal court, nor have you explained why.

• Clarified.

Campaigns

• "Count Philip I of Flanders (r. 1168–1191) landed at Acre at the head of a large army of crusaders from Europe on 1 August 1177": Which crusade was this?

• This was his first crusade.

• "Philip came to Tripoli in late October.[62] Roger de Moulins, Grand Master of the Knights Hospitallers, and more than 100 knights and 2,000 foot soldiers from the Kingdom of Jerusalem joined them in November. They attacked Hama, taking advantage of its governor's illness": These sentences make no sense. First, you describe Philip (singular) arriving at Tripoli, then you describe the Grand Master and several knights/soldiers joining "them" (plural), presumably in Tripoli, then you describe all of them attacking Hama, but the previous sentences imply that Hama is in Tripoli.

• Modified. Sorry, I do not understand your reference to the previous sentence. A sentence in section "First regency" clarifies that Saladin had seized it from the Zengids.

• What is the Estoire de Eracles?

• Clarified.

• What is meant by "first wealthy heiress"?

• Modified but I may misunderstand your concern.

Dynastic factions

• "...historian Bernard Hamilton...": False title?

• Done.

• "Raymond and Bohemond III of Antioch ride to Jerusalem in early 1180": Why is this caption in present tense, especially when the others are in the past tense?

• All captions are in present tense.

Towards Hattin

• "Raymond and his supporters decided to elect Sibylla's half-sister Isabella and her husband, Humphrey IV of Toron, king...": They decided to elect Isabella king?

• Modified. Borsoka (talk) 01:47, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

More to follow. Unlimitedlead (talk) 11:29, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

• What is the Libellus de expugnatione Terrae Sanctae per Saladinum?

• Done.

• Introduce Baha ad-Din ibn Shaddad?

• Done.

• "Lewis proposes that Raymond probably died in September": And on what ground did he propose this?

• He does not explain it.

• Introduce Alberic of Trois-Fontaines?

• Done.

That is all from me at this time. Unlimitedlead (talk) 12:55, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

Again thank you for your review and suggestions. Borsoka (talk) 01:42, 23 May 2023 (UTC)