Talk:Ewelina Hańska/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Tea with toast (talk • message • contribs • count • logs • email) 00:00, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Problems needing to be addressed

Thus far, I am impressed by the depth of information and the number of references used. There are a few areas of confusion that I would like to have worked out before I pass my review.

1. In the first sentence of the section "Marriage to Hański" the link to Wierzchownia links to a disambiguation page; I am hoping you can find the specific page it should direct to.

1. Done.

1. In the section "Becoming 'the Stranger'", the second paragraph mentions a sister "Caroline". Is this the same sister "Karolina" that is mentioned earlier in the article? If so, please keep the name spelling consistent.

1. Done.

1. Section: "Hański's death" Was the cause of his death known?

1. Not as far as I can tell, and I've written a bigger bio of him for pl wiki.

1. Same section, last paragraph: "Her marriage to Balzac would have to wait.". The wording sounds a bit colloquial, and the first half of the paragraph is slightly confusing since two different marriages are being discussed and the wording is vague. Please clarify these sentences so that it can be more clearly understood that Hanska cannot marry Balzac until her daughter is married or else Anna looses her inheritance.

1. I hope that does it.

1. Section "Second marriage and widowhood", I find the first 3 paragraphs to be very confusing in terms of the time line. There are so many different places being mentioned and so much happening between the time she presumably conceives (April 1846?) and then miscarries in November. Please try to simplify where possible and introduce more dates if necessary to improve understanding.

1. I am not sure what can be fixed beyond this. More dates would be good. I skimmed the sources but they are not clear on when the child was conceived. If you think those paras are confusing, try reading the biography by Robb... :>

1. I'm confused a bit about their eventual marriage. The article mentions (but does not give much detail about) a secret wedding that was suppose to have taken place, but then they get married much later? Is there a specific wedding date that can be given?

1. Well, the article mentions "On 14 March 1850" later. The secret wedding sentence was added by the primary author of this article before I became involved ([1]); sadly, he did not reference every single sentence, and bundling citations does not help. The sentence that followed was referenced as "Maurois, pp. 476 and 485; Cronin, p. 190; Robb, p. 371." (it has been moved now, which may create false impression the "secret marriage" claim comes from PSB - it does not. Robb does not mention the secret marriage. Maurois has no preview on Google Books and Cronin, only snippets, neither of those lends itself to online verification. As I don't consider this matter important enough to spend my time on a trip to a library, we can remove this sentence (in a sad testament to the fact that every single sentence should be referenced, or such problems will crop out, I get so tired of telling people that...sorry if this comment seems rant-like).

1. Same section: "Disaster struck in November, when Hańska suffered a miscarriage. Traumatized, she wrote to Balzac with the news." The word choice seems over dramatic for an encyclopedia. While there is a lot of Balzac in the article, there is no need to make the impression that he wrote it. :)

1. Would you be so kind and rewrite it in a more encyclopedic fashion? I agree with you to a degree, but I also find this prose better than what I'd usually create instead.

1. Was the cause of her death known? Any speculation from biographers?

1. Not in the material I've read (PSB), or I'd have added it otherwise. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk to me} 18:32, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

Please address these issues, and then I will continue with the review. --Tea with toast (話) 00:00, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Final review

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose quality:

   B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. References to sources:

   B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

   C. No original research:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   I am impressed by the breadth of scope!

   B. Focused:

4. Is it neutral?

   Fair representation without bias:

5. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

   A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

   B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:

   Very appropriate and tastefully done! I enjoy that it brings in images of other relevant figures of the time period with whom she associated with. That helps to put things in perspective of the lifestyle she had.

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

   Thank you for addressing many of the issues I set out. The remaining issues are minor and do not prevent me from giving this article a hearty pass. However, they may need to be tidied up if this article is to be nominated for FA assessment. Great job! --Tea with toast (話) 01:36, 3 September 2011 (UTC)