Talk:Maria Theresa/GA1

GA Review

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

Hi! I will be reviewing this article for GA status, and should have the full review up shortly. Dana boomer (talk) 23:36, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

   • Lead. "In addition, contemporary travellers thought her regime was bigoted and superstitious." What?

I do not understand the problem with this sentence. Could you please explain it? Surtsicna (talk) 17:24, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

1. • Birth and baptism. "The least inbred Habsburg ruler for centuries". Could you expand on what is meant by this?

Done (unlike other Habsburgs who often married their close relatives and had heavily inbred and disabled children such as Charles II of Spain, Maria Theresa's parents were distantly related). Surtsicna (talk) 17:24, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

1. • Birth and baptism. "Her body was large and immensely strong." "Immensely strong" rings a bit...verbose.

That's how a biographer described her. I changed it to "notably strong"; if it weren't notable, it wouldn't have been mentioned in the biography. Surtsicna (talk) 17:24, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

1. • I'm a little confused about the timeline. In the Heiress presumptive section you say that when Charles VI signed the treaty of 1713, one of the signatory countries made Maria's fiance give up his ancestral dutchy. However, in the Marriage section, you say that the two were not betrothed until 1723. How can he have given up his ancestral dutchy if he wasn't engaged to her (or even expecting to be engaged to her) for another decade?

Charles VI issued the Pragmatic Sanction in 1713, but France recognized it only after Francis Stephen surrendered Lorraine to the French king's father-in-law. Thus, the sentence belongs to both sections, but I moved the sentence to the following section because it can be a bit confusing. Surtsicna (talk) 17:24, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

1. • Marriage. "In the summer of 1738, the ongoing Austro-Turkish War took a turn for the worst." It may have been for the worst for Austria, but it was for the best for the Turks. Please reword.

Done. Surtsicna (talk) 17:24, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

1. • War of the Austrian Succession. "honouring "the engangements I am under"." Should this be "engagements"?

Yes, it is another editor's typo. Done. Surtsicna (talk) 17:24, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

1. • War of the Austrian Succession. "negotiating with the Diet." The what?

The Diet of Hungary. Surtsicna (talk) 17:24, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

1. • War of the Austrian Succession. "A spanner was thrown in the plans" Unencyclopedic language.

Inserted by another user. I wasn't sure what "spanner" meant, but I know what the editor tried to say. Surtsicna (talk) 17:24, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

1. • Pregnancies and childbirths. "Four more children were born during the war: Maria Elisabeth, Charles, Maria Amalia, Leopold and Maria Carolina (1748-1748)." Says four children, then names five.

The first four are notable and only they were listed when I wrote the sentence. Maria Carolina isn't notable and I added her because the text said that Maria Theresa had 16 children and three short-lived daughters were missing. Anyway, it's five. Surtsicna (talk) 17:24, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

1. • Jews and Protestants. What made Maria change her views so much with regards to the Jews? It seems an abrupt switch to go from expelling them in 1744 to having a Jewish favourite and issuing protection laws in 1762 to calling them a plague in 1777.

Maria Theresa never changed her views. Only three years before her death, she wrote that the Jews are the greatest plague and that they should be kept away. Her Jewish courtier only influenced her actions. In the third decade of her reign, due to Theben's influence, Jews were less persecuted but still hated by Maria Theresa. Surtsicna (talk) 17:24, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

1. • State revenue. "State revenue doubled itself between" Revenue cannot double itself, it must be doubled through the actions of someone. Also, this subsection is really short; is there any way it could be combined with one of the other subsections?

Done. Surtsicna (talk) 17:24, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

1. • Church. "Maria Theresa banned the creation of new burial grounds without the prior permission of the government." Why? And why is this law important enough to be mentioned when many of the laws/proclamations she made are not?

Because the burial customs were unhygienic and wasteful until then. She herself had been infected with smallpox because of these burial customs and had lost a child because of it. Surtsicna (talk) 17:24, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

1. • Seven Years War. "She suffered a crushing defeat". Is she referring to Maria Theresa?

No, she is referring to France and it's changed. Surtsicna (talk) 17:24, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

1. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

   • Ref #2 (Bartleby.com) redirects to the website home page. Once the redirect is fixed, the reference also needs more information - a title, publisher and access date at the very least.

Removed. That information doesn't need to be sourced at all, as it is covered by most (if not all) sources listed in the References section. Besides, a more reliable source followed it. Surtsicna (talk) 17:38, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

1. • Ref #85 (Hypothyroidism: the Unsusptected Illness). Is this supposed to be "Unsuspected"?

Yes. Done. Surtsicna (talk) 17:38, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

1. • I've added one fact tag to a paragraph that needs referencing, in the Religious views and policies section.

Done. Surtsicna (talk) 17:38, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

1. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

2. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

3. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

4. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

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

5. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

Here are the beginning of my comments. I'm still working on the review, just saving here so that if things crash I don't lose anything :) Will have more up in a bit. Dana boomer (talk) 00:27, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

Overall, this article is very good. It needs a few minor prose and referencing tweaks, which should be easily remedied. Please let me know if you have any questions! Dana boomer (talk) 01:07, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

Everything looks good, so I am passing the article to GA status. For the first point in the prose section, I have no idea what I was talking about when I mentioned that - on re-reading, the sentence makes complete sense. Great job with the article, and thanks for the prompt response to my comments. Dana boomer (talk) 17:35, 17 October 2009 (UTC)