Talk:Dominic Thopia

Copy Edit

Hi, @Arberian2444, I have a few small notes:

• In "Early Life and Education," it says, "Enrolled from a young age, he distinguished himself for his doctrine and for many virtuous deeds." Did Dominic write doctrine or did he perhaps distinguish himself for his knowledge of doctrine? It seems like something is missing.
• I recognize that "deputation" is a word and it's correct in this context, but for readability's sake, it might be better to use "delegation" because I think most people will not be familiar with this word (I wasn't and editing is my full-time job).
• I don't know a lot about church titles, so I may be wrong here but should the infobox say "Most Revered" at the top instead of "Most Reverend"?

SilkPyjamas (talk) 21:42, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

Hello! For the first point that is what the source said. It didn't say anything about him writing anything. For the second point yeah I think delegation could be a better choice. Finally the third point Im not sure If I did that right so you might be right about that. This is my first Wikipedia page about someone from the church. Thank you for copyediting it! Arberian2444 (talk) 22:03, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

"Most Reverend" is the correct title. :) — Moriwen (talk) 14:09, 28 April 2025 (UTC)

Feedback from New Page Review process

I left the following feedback for the creator/future reviewers while reviewing this article: Great article! Thanks for the excellent work.

— Moriwen (talk) 14:10, 28 April 2025 (UTC)

GA review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

This review is transcluded from Talk:Dominic Thopia/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Arberian2444 (talk · contribs) 19:33, 1 October 2025 (UTC)

Reviewer: Jishara (talk · contribs) 16:53, 10 July 2026 (UTC)

@Arberian2444: just a few things - mostly in 2, 4, and 6. Ping me when you get a chance to fix them, yeah? I'm giving, as per usual, 7 days. Sincerely, Jishara (talk) 05:35, 13 July 2026 (UTC)

@Jishara: Hello! I think I fixed everything you asked. For 2, I changed the Source for Lala. For 4, I fixed the "warmly", "great dedication", "notable charity" by either removing them or saying according to. As well as the "likely" ones. For 6, I asked the creator himself on his talk page if you would like to see. He said, "The image itself is an illustration of an actual photograph." I hope this solves everything. Thank you again! Arberian2444 talk 15:21, 16 July 2026 (UTC)

@Arberian2444: Sounds good! 2 is fixed, and 6 you got confirmation (which I checked) so that's fine. there's still a couple of examples of unattributed praise, though, which still makes it necessarily non-neutral. I'm just gonna list all the examples here (unattributed praise in italics) so you can go through and fix them, yeah?

"Enrolled from a young age, he distinguished himself for his doctrine and for many virtuous deeds"

"Dominic played a crucial role in bridging the gap"

"His commitment to the order led him to become court chaplain and advisor to King Robert of Naples on June 12, 1336, where he played a key role in religious and political matters"

in particular, 1 and 3 both feel like they need more details as well as attribution (what virtuous deeds, what religious and political matters). Jishara (talk) 15:39, 16 July 2026 (UTC)

@Jishara: Ok I have fixed them. Thanks! Arberian2444 talk 15:56, 16 July 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for being so efficient! Still some problems, tho - "he was praised (by who?) for his learning and virtuous deeds (such as?)", "where he advised the crown on religious and administrative matters (which matters?)", "during which he navigated both ecclesiastical and political affairs (including?)" Jishara (talk) 16:07, 16 July 2026 (UTC)

Oh, forgot the ping - @Arberian2444: Jishara (talk) 16:07, 16 July 2026 (UTC)

@Jishara: Hello! I just decided to remove those problems for both because it doesn't ever specify what deeds he did or what specific matters he advised while he was advisor and chaplain. Thank you! Arberian2444 talk 16:26, 16 July 2026 (UTC)

@Arberian2444: Looks good. Approved! Jishara (talk) 16:45, 16 July 2026 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose, spelling, grammar, and understandability): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

   Follows the manual of style in relevant parts. Prose is effective and understandable, with little to no spelling and grammar mistakes

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable, as shown by a source spot-check.

   a (reference section): b (inline citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):

   Earwig and I both don't find any signs of copyvio. Inline citations are present, and after a spot-check of 7 citations (5, 19, 6, 8, 4, 1, and 21) no errors there. However, I would ask you cite the Lala through an alternative source than Academia.edu.

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   Broad, effective perspective without going offtrack.

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

   One thing I would appreciate for neutral POV is stating which historian said x thing or y thing, especially when it's things that the article states are "likely". also a lot of terms, like "warmly", "great dedication", "notable charity", etc, that should either be attributed to a historian saying it or be cut, leaving the titles and historical assessments to speak for themselvs.

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

   No history of edit wars or anything that might impugn the stability of this article.

6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

   Are we sure image 1 is an illustration (how it's listed in wikimedia)? the other 8 look fine and are appropriately used, and all captions are right, but do we have confirmation image 1 is in fact an illustration and not a photo with transparent background? because it does appear to be a photo with a transparent background - specifically with the way the light plays off of it

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Did you know nomination

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that the 14th-century Albanian prelate Dominic Thopia rose from royal court chaplain to archbishop, using his influence to support his nephew, Karl Thopia, Prince of Albania, in taking Durrës in 1368?

• Source: "I mentioned that Dominic surely intervened with his nephew Charles Thopia when the latter (1368) took over Durrës" -

• • Reviewed:
  • Comment: Im not sure if Google Preview is working but I have the physical book with me that is where I get my quote from.

Improved to Good Article status by Arberian2444 (talk). Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.

Arberian2444 talk 17:53, 16 July 2026 (UTC).