# Talk:War of the Euboeote Succession

Is there not some contradiction with article Lordship of Negroponte regarding these 2? In the above article, they are said to be Carintana's heirs, not the "2 other triachs", which are said to be Otto of Cicone for the south (Karystos) and some "Felicia dalle Carceri" for the center (in contradiction with article Ravano dalle Carceri)--Phso2 (talk) 21:04, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

The version in the present article is definitively correct, so I'll go and check the other articles. Nice catch! It is easy to get lost in the bewildering succession lines of Frankish Greece, so don't be surprised if inconsistencies pop up... Constantine   ✍  22:19, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
another observation : in Setton p78 note 41, it's clearly stated that Carintana's husband was not William II of Villehardouin, but someone unknown...--Phso2 (talk) 23:25, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
The question of Carintana's husband is a complicated one. Most authorities agree that William II married Carintanta, others that he merely supported the claims of her heirs, including an otherwise unnamed husband. Setton supports the latter theory, but most other sources that I have seen (Miller, Fine, Koder in Negroponte: Untersuchungen zur Topographie und Siedlungsgeschichte der Insel Euboia während der Zeit der Venezianerherrschaft, Donald Nicol in Byzantium and Venice) adhere to the traditional theory whereby Carintana was William's second wife and William claimed the northern triarchy for himself, as evidenced by the coins he struck. Constantine   ✍  15:55, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:War of the Euboeote Succession/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Thurgate (talk · contribs) 19:42, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

GA review (see here for criteria)
It is reasonably well written.
prose:   (MoS): 

It is factually accurate and verifiable.

It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects):  b (focused): 

It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias: 

It is stable.
No edit wars etc.: 

It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):  b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

Overall:
Pass/Fail: 


### Comments
1. May/June 1258 Suggest not 100% on the Wiki policy with this but I believe it looks neater with May-June 1258
2. Wiki link for fief and suzerain
3. famed Achaean cavalry. Why where they famous?
4. turned to her rival, Genoa Suggest turned to his rival, Genoa
5.  Already from the. Suggest - from the
6. after by none other than. Suggest - after by

I've put the article on hold for seven days to allow you to address the issues I've brought up. Feel free to contact me on my talk page, or here with any concerns. Thurgate (talk) 12:36, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Hello and thanks for the review! On 1., the sense here is "in either May or June", not "in the period May-June", so the slash is more accurate. 2. done. 3. The Achaean knights were known even in western Europe as the flower of chivalry, and were certainly the best cavalry in Greece at the time. I'll try to track down a concrete reference for this. 4. Here the meaning of "her rival" is "Venice's rival", not "William's rival". 5. & 6., done. Constantine   ✍  16:14, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
Passed. Nice job Cplakidas. Thurgate (talk) 13:10, 7 May 2012 (UTC)