Talk:Treaty of Devol

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Treaty of Devol article.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.	Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Be welcoming	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability

	Treaty of Devol is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do.
	This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on June 23, 2005.
Article milestones Date Process Result July 27, 2004 Featured article candidate Promoted September 30, 2007 Featured article review Kept Current Status: Featured article

This History article has been selected for Version 0.5 and subsequent release versions of Wikipedia. It has been rated FA-Class on the assessment scale (comments).

This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:

WikiProject Greece      (Rated FA-Class) Greece Portal This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Greece, an attempt to expand, improve and standardize the content and structure of articles related to Greece. If you would like to participate, you can improve Treaty of Devol, or sign up and contribute in a wider array of articles like those on our to do list. If you have any questions, please consult the FAQ. FA This article has been rated as FA-Class on the quality scale. (comments) Mid This article has been rated as a Mid priority article WikiProject Middle Ages (Rated FA-Class) Middle Ages Portal Treaty of Devol is part of WikiProject Middle Ages, a project for the community of Wikipedians who are interested in the Middle Ages. For more information, see the project page and the newest articles. FA This article has been rated as FA-class on the quality scale. Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale. Article Grading: The article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need. Crusades task force WikiProject Middle Ages To do: WikiProject Law (Rated FA-Class) Law Portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it. FA This article has been rated as FA-Class on the assessment scale. Mid This article has been assessed as Mid-importance on the assessment scale. Military history WikiProject     (Rated FA-Class) This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions. FA This article has been rated as FA-Class on the quality scale. Additional information and associated task forces: Associated task forces (periods and conflicts): Medieval warfare task force (c. 500–c. 1500) Crusades task force

The spoken word version of this article is part of WikiProject Spoken Wikipedia, an attempt to produce recordings of Wikipedia articles. To participate, visit the project page.

[edit] Short

Changed 1054 (??) to 1097, the correct year. 13 Nov 2005

Thanks...that was some leftover vandalism from June 22-23, when it was on the main page. Adam Bishop 19:07, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

---

Fixed it, but no idea what was going on 24 June 2005

Have just checked the source text and the date in the first line (when the crusade started) is listed as 1054 1054 but comes out on my browser as 1654 - is there a fault? 24 June 2005

Is there a mismatch in the dates i.e. 1100's for the treaty then taliking about 1600's in the next paragraph, possibly a typo? 24 June 2005

Isn't this a bit too short to be a comprehensive FAC? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 20:49, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)

How do you suggest it be made more comprehensive? Adam Bishop 22:17, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)

An FAC doesn't have to be lengthy. This article seems to be very comprhenisve for something done in the 1100's. Falphin 18:40, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

219.130.58.19 has blanked this page numerous times today (Thu 23 June (EST))

Whoever has access to the encyclopedia/map from where the image was scanned, please scan it in in a much larger resolution and don't compress it so much (on this image the JPEG effects can be seen...)