156:
this is a subject that has a lot of fringe views and conspiracy theories attached to it, History
Channel should not be used at all. Additionally, I have also listed several other sources as likely unusable for FA on the article's talk page, including low-quality print books, unreliable websites, and a few things that look outright
179:
Thank you for bringing this up, I agree that the article is worth a re-review. As the editor who brought it to FA back in 2007, I'm taking a look now. It appears that most of the
History Channel references, which I agree are unreliable, were added to sections alongside other reliable sources, so it's
366:
I'm still a bit concerned about a few of the references, particularly - " Louis
Charpentier, Les Mystères de la Cathédrale de Chartres (Paris: Robert Laffont, 1966), translated The Mysteries of Chartres Cathedral (London: Research Into Lost Knowledge Organization, 1972)." If this is the publisher I
155:
I am very concerned with the sourcing quality in this 2007 promotion. First, the article uses the
History Channel quite extensively. While this was likely acceptable in 2007, the History Channel is now considered unreliable due to a tendency to publish fringe views/conspiracy theories. Given that
325:
Beginning in the 1960s, there have been speculative popular publications surrounding the order's early occupation of the Temple Mount in
Jerusalem and speculation about what relics the Templars may have found there, such as the quest for the Holy Grail or the Ark of the Covenant, or the historical
260:
OK, so this is a comment that it doesn't meet the criteria at several points. I think it falls short of being comprehensive. It has a "rise" and a "fall" section but nothing in between. It doesn't tell you much about them either. They were all over Europe and not just in the Holy Land and only
211:
observes) has a lot of fringe views and conspiracy theories attached to it. It is therefore incredibly important that we get this right. Since listing, the article has doubled in size - which is not a good sign. The reference section is all over the place. There is quite some reliance on the
212:
History
Channel, self-published web sites and the like. There appears to be an adequate number of good quality reliable sources on the subject. It should therefore be quite possible to write an article without the need to resort to questionable sources.
180:
a simple fix for those: I've removed all of them except for one in the
Popular Culture section, where it seems appropriate. Thank you also for noting other sources on the talkpage, I'm working my way through and will comment there as well. --
261:
10% were knights. It doesn't make it clear what the other 90% were doing all over Europe - and particularly, why they were doing it all over Europe. (OK a broad brush but you get the idea) The article states:
98:
573:
Sources are disorganised and some listed sources are not used as inline citations. Short, one paragraph sections in "Legacy" need to be merged. No active improvements since Feb.
126:
106:
138:
340:
520:. Some structural problems with the reader being told in three separate places in the article body that the Order of Christ is a successor order.
122:
118:
40:
130:
593:
134:
114:
30:
17:
604:
302:, that should be supplanted. If this is done, I would see no reason to remove the FA status. I hope this helps. With regards,
623:
582:
565:
546:
529:
512:
495:
468:
446:
422:
403:
382:
360:
334:
FAs are supposed to be comprehensive; lengthy See also needs to be rationalized (links worked into article where possible).
306:
274:
247:
221:
190:
171:
484:
435:
187:
110:
296:. As User:Hog Farm has correctly noted, however, there are some sources, such as those sourced to a website hosted on
319:
The end of the article is a series of one-paragraph sections; better section organization and themes may be needed.
160:(RILKO, possibly Mystic Realms). Sourcing needs attention from someone more familiar with this topic than I.
508:
270:
217:
399:
356:
243:
86:
619:
464:
343:
only since 2018; has a survey of recent scholarship been completed, and is the article comprehensive?
102:
94:
411:, sadly, sourcing still needs improved and there haven't been significant edits so far this month.
560:
542:
504:
417:
377:
266:
226:
213:
166:
390:
347:
234:
480:
431:
389:
None of the issues I raised have been addressed, and there have been no edits since Feb 27.
368:
292:. In my view, the article is well written and it possesses a lot of sources that would meet
184:
157:
90:
82:
61:
615:
578:
525:
460:
72:
53:
555:
538:
412:
372:
289:
230:
208:
161:
313:
293:
326:
accusation of idol worship (Baphomet) transformed into a context of "witchcraft".
611:
489:
440:
303:
181:
57:
574:
521:
600:, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please leave the
503:
no improvement - particularly coverage but other stuff mentioned above.
263:
With its clear mission and ample resources, the order grew rapidly.
39:
Further comments should be made on the article's talk page or at
459:
Issues raised in the review section include sourcing and prose.
298:
288:: Thank you for inviting for me to comment on this proposal
142:
65:
554:- improvements in late February, but more is needed.
265:
I'm not seeing where its mission is clearly stated.
316:in the top portions of the article to be resolved.
631:The above discussion is preserved as an archive.
233:; keep or delist are not declared in this phase.
331:There are HarvRef errors throughout the sources.
43:. No further edits should be made to this page.
637:No further edits should be made to this page.
610:template in place on the talk page until the
29:The following is an archived discussion of a
8:
207:: This is a controversial topic which (as
367:think it is, this source could well be
322:Copyedit needed: this is one sentence:
262:
41:Knowledge talk:Featured article review
7:
337:Further reading needs to be pruned.
24:
18:Knowledge:Featured article review
229:please see the instructions at
1:
361:05:03, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
307:05:01, 26 February 2022 (UTC)
275:03:34, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
248:02:35, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
222:03:58, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
191:17:23, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
172:04:07, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
64:) 1:54, 26 March 2022 (UTC)
143:noticed on January 21, 2022
654:
624:01:54, 26 March 2022 (UTC)
583:20:53, 23 March 2022 (UTC)
566:13:25, 23 March 2022 (UTC)
547:21:12, 22 March 2022 (UTC)
530:16:48, 22 March 2022 (UTC)
513:05:15, 22 March 2022 (UTC)
496:03:48, 22 March 2022 (UTC)
469:03:46, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
447:00:02, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
423:16:46, 11 March 2022 (UTC)
404:02:05, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
383:16:28, 1 March 2022 (UTC)
634:Please do not modify it.
36:Please do not modify it.
605:featured article review
31:featured article review
430:issues still present (
341:Google Scholar hits
127:WP Secret Societies
537:As per the above.
594:removal candidate
146:
645:
636:
609:
603:
492:
479:no improvement (
443:
396:
353:
240:
139:WP Organizations
111:WP GLAM/Pritzker
79:
48:The article was
38:
653:
652:
648:
647:
646:
644:
643:
642:
641:
632:
607:
601:
564:
490:
455:
441:
421:
394:
381:
351:
314:MOS:SANDWICHing
238:
170:
153:
123:WP Christianity
76:
73:Knights Templar
34:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
651:
649:
640:
639:
627:
626:
614:goes through.
586:
585:
568:
558:
549:
532:
515:
498:
473:
472:
454:
451:
450:
449:
425:
415:
406:
386:
385:
375:
345:
344:
338:
335:
332:
329:
328:
327:
320:
317:
310:
309:
282:
281:
280:
279:
278:
277:
253:
252:
251:
250:
196:
195:
194:
193:
164:
152:
151:Review section
149:
148:
147:
119:WP Middle Ages
75:
70:
69:
46:
45:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
650:
638:
635:
629:
628:
625:
621:
617:
613:
606:
599:
595:
591:
588:
587:
584:
580:
576:
572:
569:
567:
563:
562:
557:
553:
550:
548:
544:
540:
536:
533:
531:
527:
523:
519:
516:
514:
510:
506:
505:Cinderella157
502:
499:
497:
494:
493:
486:
482:
478:
475:
474:
471:
470:
466:
462:
457:
456:
452:
448:
445:
444:
437:
433:
429:
426:
424:
420:
419:
414:
410:
407:
405:
401:
397:
393:
388:
387:
384:
380:
379:
374:
370:
365:
364:
363:
362:
358:
354:
350:
342:
339:
336:
333:
330:
324:
323:
321:
318:
315:
312:
311:
308:
305:
301:
300:
295:
291:
290:User:Hog Farm
287:
284:
283:
276:
272:
268:
267:Cinderella157
264:
259:
258:
257:
256:
255:
254:
249:
245:
241:
237:
232:
228:
227:Cinderella157
225:
224:
223:
219:
215:
214:Cinderella157
210:
206:
205:
202:
198:
197:
192:
189:
186:
183:
178:
177:
176:
175:
174:
173:
169:
168:
163:
159:
150:
145:
144:
140:
136:
132:
128:
124:
120:
116:
112:
108:
104:
100:
99:Π Π°Π½ΠΊΠΎ ΠΠΈΠΊΠΎΠ»ΠΈΡ
96:
92:
88:
84:
78:
77:
74:
71:
68:
66:
63:
59:
55:
51:
44:
42:
37:
32:
27:
26:
19:
633:
630:
597:
590:Closing note
589:
570:
559:
551:
534:
517:
500:
488:
476:
458:
453:FARC section
439:
428:Move to FARC
427:
416:
409:Move to FARC
408:
391:
376:
348:
346:
297:
285:
235:
203:
200:
199:
165:
154:
80:
49:
47:
35:
28:
87:Devokewater
616:Nikkimaria
461:Nikkimaria
131:WP England
107:WP MILHIST
103:Afernand74
95:Berengaria
81:Notified:
54:Nikkimaria
596:has been
369:WP:FRINGE
158:WP:FRINGE
135:WP France
115:WP Cyprus
598:delisted
592:: This
556:Hog Farm
539:Hchc2009
413:Hog Farm
373:Hog Farm
209:Hog Farm
162:Hog Farm
50:delisted
395:Georgia
352:Georgia
286:Comment
239:Georgia
204:Comment
571:Delist
552:Delist
535:Delist
518:Delist
501:Delist
491:buidhe
477:Delist
442:buidhe
304:Anupam
231:WP:FAR
201:Delist
91:Anupam
83:Elonka
58:FACBot
575:Z1720
522:DrKay
392:Sandy
349:Sandy
294:WP:RS
236:Sandy
16:<
620:talk
579:talk
561:Talk
543:talk
526:talk
509:talk
465:talk
418:Talk
400:Talk
378:Talk
357:Talk
271:talk
244:Talk
218:talk
167:Talk
62:talk
56:via
612:bot
402:)
359:)
299:MSN
246:)
52:by
622:)
608:}}
602:{{
581:)
545:)
528:)
511:)
487:)
483:Β·
467:)
438:)
434:Β·
371:.
273:)
220:)
188:ka
185:on
182:El
141:,
137:,
133:,
129:,
125:,
121:,
117:,
113:,
109:,
105:,
101:,
97:,
93:,
89:,
85:,
67:.
33:.
618:(
577:(
541:(
524:(
507:(
485:c
481:t
463:(
436:c
432:t
398:(
355:(
269:(
242:(
216:(
60:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.