# Talk:1492 conclave

Excellent article. Very informative.

I'd just be careful with the Allegations of Simony section - it's NPOV leaning towards not exactly neutral - that's all. Cheers, Corvus coronoides 23:58, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

The top image needs a fair use rationale. Epbr123 00:07, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
It's used in all the conclave articles. I'll add one that applies to all of them. Savidan 00:23, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

This discussion is transcluded from Talk:Papal conclave, 1492/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the reassessment.
This article has undergone a reassessment as part of the GA sweeps performed by the Good Article Project Quality taskforce in order to ensure that it still meets the requirements for Good Article status.
Overall, this article is quite good. There are just a few small things that I would like to see:

The lead needs to be expanded to summarize the full article.
It would really help to explain a few terms briefly the first time they are used: "simony", "published", "promulgated a bull".
"Carvajal, a Spaniard and the ambassador to Ferdinand and Isabella, as well as Gonzalo Fernandez de Heredia, and Iberian and archbishop of Tarragona in charge of security, were probably chosen by Borja in his capacity as Dean." - I read this sentence three times and am still confused.
The website in the "Notes" section needs an access date.
Is it considered standard in this sort of article to not source the information in the tables (I generally prefer thorough referencing, but this might be considered material that is not contentious)? I noticed that, in at least one Papal election GA that has passed its reassessment (Papal election, 1268–1271), citations are given in the tables for "Nationality", "Order and title", and "Elevated". Is it possible to do the same here?I will place this reassessment on hold to allow for these concerns to be addressed or discussed. Best wishes, GaryColemanFan (talk) 04:01, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
Points 4 and 5 have been done CarlosPn (talk) 20:53, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
For the term "promulgated a bull", am I correct in assume that this refers to a Papal bull? If so, adding a wikilink would address my concern there. As for "published", just adding a synonym afterwards in parentheses would be sufficient. GaryColemanFan (talk) 04:48, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
I think that points 2 and 3 have been also sufficiently corrected CarlosPn (talk) 10:13, 30 August 2009 (UTC)Looks like it's all done. I'll close this as a keep. Thanks for your help. GaryColemanFan (talk) 16:32, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
One annoying thing that is starting to impact historiography outside of Spain is Catalonian historical revisionism. I'm not a Spanish historian, however, saying that Borgia's nationality was Catalan is hopelessly out of touch. I changed it to "Kingdom of Valencia," which was part of the Crown of Aragon, but if somebody really wants to put something closer to nationality, Aragonese might be more accurate. That being said, I think listing "nationality" in this particular era is a little absurd.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:300:8100:6BDE:457E:6F37:F1DB:61D5 (talk) 19:34, 4 September 2015 (UTC) 
According to the Vote count section, on the first ballot there were "nine votes for Carafa, seven for Borja, Costa, and Michiel, and five for Giuliano della Rovere", while on the second there were "nine for Carafa, eight for Borja, seven for Michiel, and five for Giuliano della Rovere". That makes 35 and 29 votes, respectively. But there were only 23 electors. Can anybody explain this discrepancy?  95.44.50.222 (talk) 13:49, 11 August 2016 (UTC)
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:2025 papal conclave which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you.  —RMCD bot 17:16, 8 June 2025 (UTC)