# Talk:Hodierna of Tripoli

This review is transcluded from Talk:Hodierna of Jerusalem/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Nominator: Surtsicna (talk · contribs) 10:21, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
Reviewer: Borsoka (talk · contribs) 13:10, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Is it well written?
A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct: 

B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation: 

Is it verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check?
A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline: 

B. Reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose): 

C. It contains no original research: 

D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism: 

Is it broad in its coverage?
A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic: 

B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style): 

Is it neutral?
It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each: 

Is it stable?
It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute: 

Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content: 

B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions: 

Overall:
Pass or Fail: 

Source review

Academic sources, including a monography about Hodierna, are cited.
Hamilton (1978): ISBN is missing. Borsoka (talk) 13:20, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
References 1, 12, 16, 20, 21, 27 are verified.
Reference 26 is to be fixed (page).
Image review

File:BnF ms. 854 fol. 121v - Jaufré Rudel (2).jpg: US PD tag is needed.
File:Manuel1 Marie.jpg: US PD tag is needed; the source is a dead link (I would delete because there is no direct connection between Manuel and Hodierna).
File:Harvard Theatre Collection - Sarah Bernhardt, La Princesse Lointaine, TC-2 (cropped).jpg: US PD tag is needed. Borsoka (talk) 13:20, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
Comments

...a Frankish crusader... Frankish? Can we refer to him as a crusader at the time of Hodierna's birth?
Rephrased, but I think the word crusader has a broad meaning. Surtsicna (talk) 18:43, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
...the states established in 1099... Edessa and Antioch were established in 1098. The establishment of Edessa is not directly connected to a victory over the Muslims.
Rephrased. Surtsicna (talk) 18:43, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
The county of Tripoli was established in 1103. Borsoka (talk) 07:03, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
Rephrased. --Surtsicna (talk) 13:43, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
Since he no longer expected to have a son, King Baldwin... I would rephrase because the previous sentence refers to Raymond: "Since King Baldwin...., he..."
Rephrased. Surtsicna (talk) 18:43, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
...may have been betrothed to... Attribute this PoV to a scholar. I would rephrase either this or the previous sentence about a possible betrothal (for instance, in the previous sentence "the prospect of marriage/eventual marriage/..." could be mentioned.
Attributed. I do not understand the rephrasing suggestion. Surtsicna (talk) 18:43, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
I would mention that the Convent of Saint Anne was in Jerusalem.
The family is mentioned as living in Jerusalem. Surtsicna (talk) 18:43, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
... in an effort to provide for her youngest sisters, Hodierna and Ioveta... Ioveta?
She is introduced in the preceding paragraph. Surtsicna (talk) 18:43, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
Yes, but in this sentence she should not be mentioned. She was sent to a monastery. Borsoka (talk) 07:03, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
That was Baldwin II's doing. Melisende's "effort to provide for her youngest sisters" included making Ioveta an abbess. Barber does not say that she made an effort just for Hodierna but for Hodierna and Ioveta. --Surtsicna (talk) 13:43, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
Read the sentence: it implies that the marriage was an effort to provide both younger sisters. The sentences should be rephrased. Borsoka (talk) 05:48, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
Ah, I see how you could read it like that. Rephrased. Surtsicna (talk) 09:22, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
Still strange. The marriage had nothing to do with Joveta. Either delete any reference to Joveta in context or radically rephrase the sentence. Borsoka (talk) 01:44, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
Reference to Joveta removed.  Surtsicna (talk) 11:30, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
Ioveta, on the other hand, was made an abbess. Is this necessary?
No. Surtsicna (talk) 18:43, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
"Dealing with pretenders" is a misleading title, it implies pretenders and tacitly attributes their faith to Hodierna.
Renamed. Surtsicna (talk) 18:43, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
An anonymous monk... I would clarify that he was a French monk, or that he wrote it in France.
He was not. I clarified that he was from Mountjoy. Surtsicna (talk)
No, he was from France. Check Barber's text.
You are right: the author was from France, and his informant may have been a monk from Mountjoy. --Surtsicna (talk) 13:43, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
Alfonso's son Bertrand... I would mention that he was an illegitimate son.
I do not think it makes much difference. Surtsicna (talk) 18:43, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
As he wanted allegedly seize the county, it makes much difference.
No author comments on that. You do not have to be legitimate, or even a relative, to seize. But since we do not have an article about Bertrand yet, it does not hurt to have extra information about him in existing articles. --Surtsicna (talk) 13:43, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
All cited author who write of him also mention that he was an illegitimate son. Borsoka (talk) 05:48, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
...who seized Urayma and captured Bertrand... Close paraphrasing?
Rephrased. Surtsicna (talk) 18:43, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
...the queen had an accomplice... I would name the queen.
Done. Surtsicna (talk) 18:43, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
... he fell in love with Countess Hodierna without ever having seen her; he then sailed to Tripoli, only to die in her arms. Rephrase to avoid close paraphrasing.
Rephrased. Surtsicna (talk) 18:43, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
I am not sure. Borsoka (talk) 07:03, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
Expanded. --Surtsicna (talk) 13:43, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
...with Countess Hodierna... Delete her title.
Rephrased. Surtsicna (talk) 18:43, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
Link Occitan.
Linked. Surtsicna (talk) 18:43, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
...might hint that Hodierna was the first to introduce the Templars in Tripoli... Rephrase to avoid close paraphrasing.
Rephrased. Surtsicna (talk) 18:43, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
...after her father-in-law spurned them Delete (it is only an assumption and not too relevant).
Deleted. Surtsicna (talk) 18:43, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
Lewis speculates that Raymond envied her higher social status. This is not what Lewis writes (and page 168 should also be referred to cover the whole situation).
Added "may have". Lewis mentions Raymond's "lesser rank", "the inequality of status", and explores whether "Raymond envied Hodierna’s standing in high society". Surtsicna (talk) 18:43, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
This is only part of the story. Lewis also wrote of Raymond's marginalised role, and Hodierna's involvement in politics. Borsoka (talk) 07:03, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
...decided to take Hodierna back to Jerusalem. Rephrase to avoid close paraphrasing.
I do not think that such a simple sentence can be rephrased without altering the meaning. Surtsicna (talk) 18:43, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
...while he was returning to Tripoli,... He was assassinated when he arrived at the city.
Rephrased. Surtsicna (talk) 18:43, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
...his mother and aunt... I would name them.
The sentence becomes rather awkward. Baldwin III is described as Hodierna's nephew, and I inserted a further explanation that he was Melisende's son, all in the same paragraph. Surtsicna (talk) 18:43, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
Why do not you mention Richard's alternative view of Hodierna's regency?
Mentioned. Surtsicna (talk) 23:31, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
...Emperor Manuel I Komnenos asked King Baldwin to select a new wife for the widowed emperor... Rephrase to make it clear that Manuel was the widowed emperor.
Rephrased. Surtsicna (talk) 23:31, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
...had secretly chosen... Secretly?
The Greeks had with them a chrysobull detailing the new arrangement, suggesting that secret negotiations with the Antiochenes had begun long before Manuel’s official repudiation of Melisende of Tripoli. Surtsicna (talk) 23:31, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
His choice was announced in public. Borsoka (talk) 07:03, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
"Secretly negotiated" then. Surtsicna (talk) 09:22, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
...followed the "somewhat disappointing example set by his father rather than the more promising precedent of his mother",... In what?
Clarified. Surtsicna (talk) 23:31, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
...though she had a greater influence On what/who?
Clarified. Surtsicna (talk) 23:31, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
There are two Raymonds. I would say "on her son". Borsoka (talk) 07:03, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
I tried it, but ended up choosing "Raymond III". --Surtsicna (talk) 13:43, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
...most countesses of Tripoli are relatively obscure figures... Rephrase to avoid close paraphrasing.
Rephrased. Surtsicna (talk) 23:31, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
Rudel's infatuation with Hodierna remained a topic of popular interest into the modern period, becoming the subject of the 19th-century operetta La Princesse lointaine by Edmond Rostand and a joke in one of P. G. Wodehouse’s novellas in the 20th century. Rephrase to avoid close paraphrasing. Borsoka (talk) 03:26, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
Rephrased. Surtsicna (talk) 23:31, 26 December 2024 (UTC)