# Talk:Lovro Šitović


### Lovro Šitović
I've listed this article for peer review because I want it to become a featured or at least an A-class article.
Thanks, Governor Sheng (talk) 12:07, 14 May 2025 (UTC)
Looks like an interesting article. Reading over the lead, here are a few comments:

was a Croatian Franciscan friar, grammarian, preacher, – Suggest linking Franciscans
he was kidnapped as a child during the Morean War by Catholic hajduks – Similarly, I'd link hadjuk
This event led to his exposure to Catholicism, – "This exposed him to ..."?
and at age 17, he converted, taking the name Stipan upon his baptism in 1699. – I'd suggest including only one of "age 17" and "1699"
and embarked on a remarkable career that blended scholarly pursuits with pastoral service. – Per MOS:PUFFERY, I would exclude "remarkable", and probably "embarked" (though you can quote a scholar's evaluation of his career, if you think it's appropriate)
it became the most influential grammar among Croats – I think there might be a missing word here?
a poetic critique of secular folk songs as well as other devotional texts that resonated with Catholic readers – I'd use "and" in place of "as well as"
Educated in Italy and ordained a priest in 1707, – Did both of these things happen in 1707, or just the latter?
During the Ottoman–Venetian and Austro-Turkish wars, – I'd link both
Renowned as a preacher, he was hailed alongside Jesuit Ardelio Della Bella as one of southern Croatia's greatest orators. – Similarly, I would try to be more specific and detached in terms of language. I'd replace "hailed" and "renowned", and mention who considered him one of southern Croatia's greatest orators (my assumption is that it was the people of southern Croatia, but I might be wrong).
Šitović died in Šibenik in 1729 while preaching a Lenten sermon, – I'd link Lent
Only a minor point, but, per MOS:IBP, information in the infobox should generally be covered in the article, so I would add a bit about Relković in the article (or remove him from the infobox)
Two other notes, on a scan of the article's body:

Per MOS:GLOSS, glosses should use single quotes, which can be added using {{gloss}} if you like (that is, we should have "Pisna od pakla ('A song of hell')", "Doctrina christiana et piae aliquot cantilenae ('Christian doctrine and some pious hymns')", etc.).
The sentence Toma Babić had published his work ... has two semicolons. This isn't necessarily disallowed, but it's uncommon, and starting a new sentence would be preferable I think.
– Michael Aurel (talk) 05:22, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for your comments. I applied those to the article where I could. I'll need you to explain me what do you mean by "I think there might be a missing word here?" while commenting "it became the most influential grammar among Croats".
Also, regarding your question: "did both of these things happen in 1707, or just the latter?", the answer is, his education in Italy occurred prior and during 1707. However, all scholars I consulted wrote that his time in Italy cannot be exactly determined. Governor Sheng (talk) 10:19, 28 May 2025 (UTC)
Just a few follow-up points:
To clarify my "missing word" comment, my assumption was that the word "Latin" was supposed to be present in the statement (or some other form of qualification, as otherwise we seem to stating that it has been the most influential grammar in any language). Though perhaps we do mean it has been the most influential in any language? Checking over the relevant part of the article, it's not entirely clear to me where this claim appears in the body.
and took a career that blended scholarly pursuits with pastoral service. – perhaps "began", in place of "took"?
Noted as a preacher, he was considered alongside Jesuit Ardelio Della Bella as one of southern Croatia's greatest orators. – Hmm, checking the corresponding sentence in the article, we seem to call him one of the greatest "preachers" (rather than "orators"), though I wouldn't necessarily consider the two synonymous ("orators" could include secular speakers, for example). The sentence in the article's body also seems to be in the present tense; who is/was doing the "considering"? Also, as the red link for Ardelio Della Bella is used in the lead, I'd suggest adding it in the body as well.
regarding your question: "did both of these things happen in 1707, or just the latter?", the answer is, his education in Italy occurred prior and during 1707. – Understood, thankyou. As the current wording could be interpreted as saying he was educated in 1707, I would try to separate the two parts a bit more, and perhaps assign them separate dates (if possible). Or you could also omit the part about the priesthood if you think it's less significant here, which might make this rephrasing easier.
To add one further point, it might be worth considering that the second and third paragraphs of the lead seem to correspond to the third and second sections of the article, respectively (that is, the order is different). – Michael Aurel (talk) 12:59, 28 May 2025 (UTC)
Can you check if I managed to get all these done properly? Thank you! Governor Sheng (talk) 19:16, 29 May 2025 (UTC)
No problem. Here are a few further points, some extending a bit beyond my initial suggestions:
Noted as a preacher, he is considered, alongside Jesuit Ardelio Della Bella, as one of southern Croatia's greatest preachers. – I would say that the "Noted as a preacher" part probably isn't needed anymore, unless, for example, we added something such as "in his time", to draw a contrast between evaluations then and now (though I'm not entirely sure whether doing so is justified by the current text in the body).
he is considered, alongside Jesuit Ardelio Della Bella, as one of southern Croatia's greatest preachers. – I see you've added the relevant historians in the body, thanks for that. It's worth considering that I think "he is considered ..." could be interpreted as a statement that this is an accepted view. If you wanted, you could attribute the evaluation directly to the two scholars, or you could write "He has been evaluated, alongside Jesuit Ardelio Della Bella, as ..." if you think the scholars' names would be too much detail in the lead.
I'd add an {{ill}} for Stipan Zlatović, and I'd consider adding dates (or centuries) for the historians, as I had assumed they were fairly recent, but Zlatović, for example, seems to have been from the 19th century. Also, link Lent there in the body.
Designed for Croat schoolchildren, it became a very influential Latin grammar among Croats, widely used by Franciscan educators for over a century. – We could probably still be a little more specific here. In particular, "very influential [...] among Croats" could mean a few things, but here we mean in particular that it influenced later Croat grammarians. Consider something along the lines of "Designed for Croat schoolchildren, it influenced a number of subsequent Croat grammarians, and was widely used by Franciscan educators for over a century."
I'd also note that the sentence His work influenced Croat grammarians from Slavonia, Marijan Lanosović, ... doesn't quite work; "including" maybe, after "Slavonia"?
The other solutions all look good. – Michael Aurel (talk) 23:13, 29 May 2025 (UTC)
Ok, thanks again. I've made the adjustments as suggested. Governor Sheng (talk) 08:51, 30 May 2025 (UTC)
Great, all of those solutions look good. That's all from me – best of luck with FAC! – Michael Aurel (talk) 11:16, 30 May 2025 (UTC)