# Talk:Arnold II of Isenburg

This review is transcluded from Talk:Arnold II of Isenburg/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Nominator: Kusma (talk · contribs) 16:59, 14 April 2024 (UTC)
Reviewer: Yakikaki (talk · contribs) 21:27, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
I'll take on this review. I will get back in the coming days with comments. Yakikaki (talk) 21:27, 23 April 2024 (UTC)


### Review
Overall, the article is in a good shape without any glaring problems. For someone who is interested in medieval history and German culture, I enjoyed reading it a lot! 
I have two main concerns which I would like to see addressed. 
Firstly, the article lacks somewhat of context. The facts of the biography of Arnold are very well presented, but should be put into somewhat more perspective. For example, he came from an important family, part of the local aristocracy ("Als Sohn von Graf Bru­no von Isen­burg-Brauns­berg (ge­stor­ben vor 1210) und der Theo­do­ra Grä­fin von Wied (ge­stor­ben wohl um 1218) stamm­te Ar­nold von be­deu­ten­den rechts­rhei­ni­schen Adels­ge­schlech­tern ab., as we learn here). This helps put his life in context, and should be noted. Similarly, a few words on the importance of the different religious institutions he came to be associated with. St Lubentius for example seems to have been a very prestigious church, not to mention of course Trier Cathedral itself. That he being Archbishop was also an Elector, one of the most high-ranking officials in the HRE, is as far as I can see not even mentioned. His embroilment in the politics of the times also needs more context. You don't need to add much, just a few words here and there, a sentence occasionally perhaps, both in the lead section and (mainly) in the article body. Let me know if you want detailed suggestions on this, or if you prefer to do it yourself.
Secondly, some of the sources are rather old. Two of them are almost 150 years old! Only two are from the 21st century. Is it at possible to strengthen the article with some further, more recent sources? This (which is also not super-new) supposedly (according to this) contains a short biography of Arnold. A few crumbs seem available here, here and here. Admittedly not much, but it is what I could find myself using a cursory search. Perhaps you could have access to more sources? Age matters, and I think the sources you have used from before 1900 should to as far extent as possible be concurred by more recent research.
Apart from that, I have listed below some minor changes to the prose which I would suggest.

Provide wikilinks (to Wikipedia or Wiktionary) for: provostship, cathedral school, cathedral chapter, [un-]canonical,  anti-king of Germany
done
The provostship at the cathedral, the second highest position in the diocese after the episcopal seat, had become vacant upon the death of Rudolf de Ponte (senior); Arnold's main competitor for this position was another member of the de Ponte family, also called Rudolf, who was given the provostship of St Paulin instead in order to ascertain Arnold's election. Long sentence, consider re-writing.
split
civil war sounds a bit awkward to me in English. I understand it is the correct translation of Bürgerkrieg, but perhaps "armed conflict", "hostilities", "armed conflict between the parties" or something along those lines could be used instead? "Civil war" sounds to me more modern, more pre-supposing an actual state somehow..? Consider the wording, I'm not going do be dogmatic about it.
rephrased
He died soon after, which ended the conflict. Either write "He died soon after, whereby the conflict ended." or "His death soon after ended the conflict."
clarified
After a failed attempt to declare Arnold's election as uncanonical in a trial in Rome. Who tried to declare the election uncanonical? The pope? Re-phrase for clarity. I suggest: "Pope Innocent IV attempted to declare Arnold's election uncanonical in a trial in Rome, but was forced to confirm Arnold as archbishop in 1245. Arnold was consecrated[...]"
I think the politics was a bit more complicated, and it was Arnold's enemies (mostly del Ponte family and friends like the rulers of Luxembourg) who used the trial as a final attempt to fight Arnold. Innocent not only waited until after Rudolf's death, but also until a time when he could use Arnold's support against the Hohenstaufen dynasty.
In the last section, "Archbishop of Trier", you use the word "elected" a few times, while it seems to me than in several of that cases you really mean "voted for", "favoured" or "attempted to elect", since his candidate never assumed power?
Used a bit more variety.
That's it from me for the moment. Kind regards, Yakikaki (talk) 16:55, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

Thank you! These are all good points. I'll try to get to this over the weekend. As to "civil war", I would consider the Electorate of Trier to be an "actual state", just like ancient Rome. But the conflict is smaller in scale than the Mainz Diocesan Feud and so perhaps "war" is a slight overstatement. I'll think about it. —Kusma (talk) 16:04, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
In one of the sources you pointed out, I found a citation of this 66 page article in the de:Rheinische Vierteljahrsblätter. It is yet another article by Rudolf Holbach, but it seems pretty comprehensive. I should be able to replace the 19th century sources. —Kusma (talk) 15:55, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
Excellent, looks like a promising source. The article is coming along very nicely. Kind regards, Yakikaki (talk) 16:19, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
Yakikaki, thank you again for the review. I have replaced a few sources by Holbach 1983 (the article no longer cites the 19th century Allgemeine Deutsche Biographie nor its mid-20th century successor Neue Deutsche Biographie). Waitz 1879 is part of the still prevailing source edition of medieval documents. It is technically redundant here but I like citing the original source. Some other responses above; let me know what you think (and especially if you would like me to expand some aspects). —Kusma (talk) 22:21, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
Thanks, I'll have a look and get back. I'm busy until Sunday but will respond as quickly as I can after that. Regards, Yakikaki (talk) 19:50, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
Kusma, thank you for these improvements. The article meets the GA criteria, I will promote it now. Kind regards, Yakikaki (talk) 16:07, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
@Yakikaki: Thank you for your helpful review, it was a pleasure! —Kusma (talk) 16:14, 5 May 2024 (UTC)