Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Habsburg Spain/archive2

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Habsburg Spain[edit]

In the previous nomination of this article, it was described by some as a "tour de force" and one of the "best pages" on Wikipedia. Consensus was not reached however. In evaluating the article now, I find that either 1) some objections previously raised were bogus; or 2) legit objections have certainly been reasonably accounted for. --DanielNuyu 08:40, 15 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment: Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Habsburg Spain/archive1 is the old FACfailed discussion. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 11:08, 15 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • It's a nice overview, but I think it may be a bit picture-heavy. All those pictures don't have to be crammed into a single article. Everyking 13:37, 15 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • I agree with Everyking, especially since this article is not an article about art; all these pictures, while most are aesthetically pleasing, do not really add to the article. Please select a few a put the others somewhere else (or on Commons if you can't find an article to put them in). Otherwise, excellent article.Phils 18:56, 15 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    • I haven't yet been able to find a Wikipedia policy on images (as far as quantity goes), but I feel that the pictures in this article add to its readability. I think that the pictures help retain the interest of people who might otherwise have only a passing curiosity for the subject, which might be a problem when talking about continental European history in the seventeenth century to an Anglo-American audience. Thinking about newsmagazines and (for instance) many current textbooks for schoolchildren, where keeping the reader's interest is at a premium, it seems clear to me that the editors view a lot of color as a means to that end. I did take one image out because it made for uncomfortable formatting, though, and I would be fine taking out others if that's the consensus. I was the crackpot who put them there in the first place. :) Adam Faanes 20:46, 15 May 2005 (UTC
      • I respect your opinion, but I personally feel the large number of pictures to be distracting, not to mention it probably dramatically increases load time for people with slower connections. Phils 22:57, 15 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
        • I agree with Phils. --mav 23:49, 15 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I happen to like the pics and I agree that they make for a much more readable article, though I also concur that if I didn't have Broadband, I'm sure my loading time would be miserable. I would keep most of the portraits (especially if they're not located anywhere else on Wikipedia) but do away with the majority of the battle and other scenes leaving maybe one or two of the better ones, as the most of them are harder to make out as thumbnails. I must say though, Phillip IV and Charles II of Spain were certainly good looking! My word! Hot! Hot! Hot! :-) Ganymead 03:42, 16 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I was thinking about the download time, and it occurred to me that it might not be as big of a problem as we might think that it is; most browsers tend to load the text first, display that, and then put up the images as they come. Even if the images take a while to come, they can bide their time reading the text (as we should hope) and still keep their attention with the color that the images add to the page, when they come. And, personally, I think that even the battle images add something to the page, if only color. (The only really unclear image, I think, is the Battle of Pavia image; the rest of the images, particularly those in the later sections, tend to have more vibrant colors). And have a look at this picture of the Count of Olivares for a stunning example of male beauty in the seventeenth century. Adam Faanes 16:33, 16 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    • Wiki is not paper. The pics are nice. I would like for all the pics to stay - their abundance is nice, and cetainly it doesn't constitute any official reason for objection. I'd like to receive a reply on article's talk page about the relevance of characters I mention there, though, before I support. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 10:27, 16 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    • See talk page. Adam Faanes 16:33, 16 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Minor object. After looking through the article, I see some problems with internal links and disambiguation: while some mentioned rulers are not ilinked, others are linked to disambigs. I fixed Ferdinan II references in text, and before I remove my object - and likely support this otherwise good article - I'd like to hear from the author that he has went over all names, linked them and/or fixed disambigs. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 10:33, 16 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Object. The objections about picture-heaviness are valid. There's no need to debate the details of official policy to see that this article is too burdened by an abundance of pictures. The paintings of monarchs, battles and high nobility should also be much balanced against those of peasant life by Pieter Brueghel the Elder and the likes. / Peter Isotalo 14:13, May 16, 2005 (UTC)
With all due respect, if there isn't an official policy then we are discussing style. It seems that, of the people who have commented so far, that it's at least an open question as to whether or not there are presently too many pictures. I would be more than happy to remove the pictures myself if there were such a consensus or such a standing policy. Adam Faanes 16:33, 16 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
There is an official policy on this at Wikipedia:Image use policy. But even without that, objections on the overuse of images are still valid. Making almost all the images the default thumb width will help. Some other images will need to be removed or at least turned into (see image) inline links. See below for an example why (at standard resolution of 800x600).--mav 17:20, 16 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
File:Maveric149-temp.PNG
This is too crowded
Aha - I see what you mean. It looks a bit different on 800x600. I tried reformatting some of the pictures so that they would look better on lower resolutions. Adam Faanes 19:14, 16 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I must also point out that out of the 33 pictures in the article right now, there is not a single historical map of Habsburg Spain or its colonies.
Peter Isotalo 21:31, May 16, 2005 (UTC)
I've copyedited large portions of the article and inserted comments on several issues that should be adressed. Judging from what I've seen so far, the text seems to be good, but there are many minor errors, inconsistencies and slightly illogical sentences that need to be proof-read. Peter Isotalo 15:59, May 18, 2005 (UTC)
  • Comment. One of the most attractive aspects of Spanish history during this period is the pageantry of the age, which included some of the greatest artists of all time. We should try to capture the reader's attention and try to engross him or her in that pageantry, even if it distracts them a bit from the text. The reader will get to that in his/her own time - the important thing is to capture his/her attention first and get them interested. I can't say for certain, but I feel that when people said that this article was a "tour de force" they were saying that not only out of respect for the prose, but also because the article captures some of the majesty, color, and emotion of the era in ways that only Velazquez could. That's what I was trying for when I put these images in to begin with. Adam Faanes 16:33, 16 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    • My comment is not an objection, just a comment. However, I'd like to remind you that this is an encyclopedia: our first goal is to provide people with the information they were looking for when they typed "Habsburg Spain" in the search box, not to have them wait 30 seconds to be "captivated" by an enourmous amount of picture. If someone wants to look at pretty pictures, they have Wikimedia Commons to do that. Speaking of Velazquez, look at the article about him, it's less crowded with pictures, yet it is only about him, a painter (whereas Habsburg Spain was an epoch/country). Notice how there is a link to a picture gallery of his works at the bottom of the page. Again, this is not an objection, it's just a comment. I will read the article in more detail when I have time - I happen to know a bit on the subject- before I vote. Phils 19:47, 16 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Though some inline citations for important points would be even better. - Taxman 17:40, May 16, 2005 (UTC)
  • support very nice pics!!!! (except the one of charles II) -Pedro 01:57, 17 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
File:Habsp.JPG
It looks fine to me.
    • Of course it looks fine - that is at 1024x768 not the 800x600 (standard res). --mav 03:30, 17 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • In 800x600 every article looks terrible. I admit we should remove one or two pics (priority to Charles II!!!!) eheheh -Pedro 13:00, 17 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The removal of Charles II image would increase the quality of the article, people will stop reading the article if they see it. LOL. BTW, ending the voting, this image that I've created can be deleted, it is useless. -Pedro 02:39, 17 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

  • Minor object, the lack of a map is quite an oversight, as is the lack of explanation for why it is called the Age of Expansion (I only know it is because of the series box). I agree that the amount of pics is a little overwhelming, especially on a small monitor (but I'm not objecting on this point), perhaps some could be moved to specific articles on a person etc. Support--nixie 03:51, 17 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    • the Portuguese Empire and the spanish one were separated (obviously controled by the same people), I never saw one with them together. The Portuguese continued to settled and explore Brazil, Africa and southest asia, and Spain central and south America, along with the philipines. The articles explains what was the Empire of the H. Spain, if you read it you wouldnt complain "it lacks a map". Besides the map would be probably innacurate in colonial aspects and desnecessary. Maybe an Europe's map would be easier. I think the picture of Charles II should go. lol. it would reduce the amount of pictures and the article will continue a candy to the eyes. Besides, it will lokk better, because when a person sees that pictures after seing so many beautiful paitings will jumb from the chair if they see that. -Pedro 10:16, 17 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Addressing some concerns: Piotr, nixie, see the new map that has now been included; As far as the issue of the pictures go, I have taken the liberty of removing some. They include: the second picture of Olivares, one of the king of Portugal, one of the Battle of Pavia, and Ricci's auto de fe. At all times, keeping proper format of the article was my goal. Although I am for the inclusion of these pictures, the current reduction is in an attempt to form a compromise with those who think the article contains too many. Please continue this dialogue—those who thought there were too many pictures, consider how the article appears now. --DanielNuyu 23:33, 17 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    • It looks much better now, though two pictures per section seems like reasonable layout to me. A lot of them still have three, and most of those are still of a lot of royalty and nobility (they will seem dull to a lot of readers). There are also some pictures that I really think the article could do without:
The Vision of Teresa Avila
The allegory of Charles V - He's already depicted at the top of the article; it seems excessive to have two paintings.
Jakob Fugger - Though obviously a fairly important figure he is not mentioned in the article and is moreover Dutch.
Las Meninas by Velázquez - The picture is bigger than the section art and culture, which really doesn't look good at all. Consider expanding the section, though not adding more pictures. ;-)
And one thing that really strikes me as way too distracting is the huge picture of "The Glory of Spain" in the History of Spain article series template. Article series templates, when having pictures at all, should keep them to the size of the links in the template.
Peter Isotalo 07:50, May 18, 2005 (UTC)

New edits to address objections:

  • Peter Isotalo
    • Each of the four images aforementioned has been removed in accordance with your suggestion
    • Two paintings by Pieter Brueghel the Elder now appear, even as I believe that the same logic used to remove Fugger from this article could apply against including Brueghel's work
    • I completely agree with you about The Glory of Spain in the template, and a smaller (but still essentially comprehensible) rendition appears now
    • A few sentences were added to the Art/Culture section, but I don't want to keep going with it and make it look like a rehash of the Golden Age article it already suggests to link to
      • Eeexcellent! If you could just add one final paragraph with some information on the most famous painters of the period and I'll be satisfied. Objection withdrawn. Peter Isotalo 21:23, May 20, 2005 (UTC)
  • nixie
    • See the map
    • That the Habsburg period was an "Age of Expansion" is a somewhat implicit consideration throughout the article, but an explicit mention now appears in the lead section

--DanielNuyu 04:36, 20 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I've gone through and removed about half the images (mostly ones that were only peripherally related), and right alinged almost all the rest. It should look good on big and small resolutions. →Raul654 20:11, May 21, 2005 (UTC)

  • Looks good without all the pics! Very nice article! Support. Ganymead 22:06, 21 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Looking good indeed. Peter Isotalo 22:51, May 21, 2005 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Habsburg_Spain/archive2&oldid=870076700"