Talk:Mary of Hungary (governor of the Netherlands)/GA1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: Nikkimaria (talk) 02:45, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Hello! I'll be reviewing this article for possible GA status. My review should be posted shortly. Cheers, Nikkimaria (talk) 02:45, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Doing..., will continue in the morning. Nikkimaria (talk) 04:02, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
I've decided to place this article on hold to allow time for the below issues to be addressed. Nikkimaria (talk) 14:52, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Writing and formatting[edit]

  • Don't use contractions in article text except where quoting
    •  Done, I suppose. I'll go through the article once again to check for more contractions.
  • You've currently got a mixture of British and American English = pick one and stick to it
    • I have requested help here.
      • I have given the article one copy-edit pass and did not spot any instances of British/American English that conflict. If you could you point out the ones you noticed that would be great. Thanks. --Diannaa (Talk) 21:13, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
        • Well, the most obvious one is that it uses both "traveled" and "travelled". It also uses "skillful", which is American, whereas "defences" is British.
          • Thanks. --Diannaa (Talk) 21:45, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
            • I have now finished the copy edits. --Diannaa (Talk) 17:44, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
  • Please add WP:PDATA
    •  Done
  • Is it possible to insert information about her governorship in the infobox?
    • Certainly.  Done
  • Prose would benefit from a quick read-through - there are several instances of missing articles and similar errors. Perhaps inquire at WP:GOCE?
  • "posthumously-born Archduchess Catherine" - I'm not sure I understand this. My interpretation would be that she was born dead, but then it wouldn't make sense to say she remained at Castile. Could you re-word for clarity?
    • Catherine was born after her father's death. I have linked to the article posthumous birth.
  • "This passion will later be demonstrated" - check tense, as this will not happen in the future
    •  Done
  • "Austria's ambassador, Andrea de Borgo, was accredited to the Queen" - I'm not sure what this means. Did the queen appoint the ambassador?
    • I suppose; the source says: "her court...formed a power-base for the Hapsburg interests represented by the ambassador Andrea de Borgo, who was actually accredited to her."
      • Well, you could say "The appointment of Austria's...", but you'd probably be better off being direct and saying "The Queen appointed Austria's ambassador, Andrea de Borgo" or similar
        •  Done
  • "Mary negotiated significant authority and influence" - do you mean she has authority and influence?
    • I wanted to say that she had acquired significant authority and influence. The source used the word negotiated so I thought it made sense. Would it be better to replace it with the word acquired?
      • Either use "acquired" or add "for herself" to the end of the sentence
        •  Done
  • Explain or link potentially unfamiliar terms like "maître de chappelle"
    •  Done
  • Don't start sentences with "But"
    •  Done

Accuracy and verifiability[edit]

  • Consider putting the footnotes into two columns
  • "This act caused great dismay of Mary's brother Ferdinand" - source?
    • It's already cited - citation number 9. Link: [1] The citation covers every sentence in the paragraph, save for the last (which is covered by another citation). Should I change something about it?
  • "Though she was relieved when her Hungarian regency ended, Mary soon experienced financial troubles, illnesses and loneliness" - source?
    • Already there, citation number 12. It covers the entire paragraph.[2]
  • "such affairs need a person wiser and older" - source?
    • Also covered by citation number 12, which can be found at the end of the paragraph that contains that quote.[3]
  • "Mary determinedly opposed this decision, explaining to Charles that Christina was too young for consummation of the marriage" - source?
    • As cited at the end of the paragraph - Jansen, pages 100-101.[4]
  • "he had learned that Mary could not easily be bullied, especially not in matters which affected her personally" - source?
    • Already cited (citation number 2).[5]
  • "she never wore anything but black after her husband's death" - source?
    • A translation of [6]. It is already mentioned that she mourned Louis all her life and that's sourced, so we can remove that claim if it's a problem.
      • Since that image description is also unsourced, you can't really include the claim
  • "She was afraid that Eleanor's death would leave her alone in the country whose customs she did not know" - source?
    • Already cited. The entire paragraph is sourced (citation number 25).
      • Okay. For many of these it's unclear whether the cited source supports the whole paragraph or not. For most of these, I think you're okay as-is, with a couple of exceptions: "such affairs need a person wiser and older", which as a direct quote is best cited immediately; "he had learned that Mary could not easily be bullied, especially not in matters which affected her personally", though not a direct quote, is such an opinionated statement that it's probably best to repeat the citation
        •  Done
  • "Iongh" -> "de Iongh"
    •  Done
  • "Koenigsberger considers Mary's reputation of sympathy for Lutheranism "much-exaggerated"" - if you're going to use the author's name in the text, you should include their full name and a brief description of their credentials, ie "Austrian historian Helmut Georg Koenigsberger considers...", or whatever his credentials are
    •  Done? He was an Emeritus Professor of History at King's College, University of London. Should that be mentioned or is "historian Helmut Georg Koenigsberger" enough?
      • Just "historian" is fine, thanks
  • Only sources used in "Footnotes" should appear in "Bibliography" - others should be moved into a "Further reading" section
    •  Done
  • Use dashes instead of hyphens for page ranges
    •  Done
  • "Cambridge University of Illinois Press" - double-check this
    •  Done
  • Piret - translate place name into English
    •  Done

Broad[edit]

  • "she took control over a powerful political faction and neutralised another one" - could you be more specific?
    • Unfortunatly, I can't, as the source itself is not specific. Apparently, that action of hers is mentioned because the historian wanted to describe how much political power she held.
      • Okay. In that case, just remove "one" from the end of the sentence.
        •  Done
  • A bit too much emphasis on her "happy marriage"
    • The article says their marriage was happy twice. Should I remove that statement from the lead or...? At one point, I even though there was not enough emphasis on her happy marriage, as her biographers tend to write about it a lot. I suppose it's because arranged marriages are rarely happy.
      • It says that exact phrase twice, that they fell in love, that they had little time to spend together, that she continuously mourned him, that she had truly loved him...all in all, it's a bit too much.
        • I understand. I got rid of some of those stuff[7] but had to keep the last two you had cited (though with some modifications). I am not sure how to reword the "The couple fell in love upon being united in Buda" sentence. Any suggestions?

Neutrality[edit]

  • Check out WP:W2W and WP:ASF - avoid editorial bias
  • Make sure that everything is written in an encyclopedic tone - certain phrasings are a bit essay-like

Could you please be more specific about these two advices? Is the article biased in favour of Mary? Or is there too much emphasis on her ugliness and cynicism? Could you please cite one essay-like sentence (so that I know what to fix)?

I wouldn't say it's overtly biased either in favour of or against Mary. The issue is more the tone - it's flowery and opinionated in places, and doesn't reflect what we would expect from a neutral encyclopedia article, which is generally more factual and academic. You use some words listed at W2W (great, feel). You talk a lot about people's feelings - they're bitter, they're dismayed, they're reluctant, etc. Per WP:ASF, you should avoid asserting opinions or emotions in favour of facts - instead of saying Charles "refused to listen", say he "proceeded despite her objections". Also, be wary of supporting stereotypes, like "truly feminine" - instead ", qualities considered feminine by contemporary society".
I see. I've tried to fix the problem - [8].

Stability[edit]

No issues noted

Images[edit]

  • Despite their shortened nature, captions should be written in clear and correct prose
    • Which images have captions written in unclear or incorrect prose? I've fixed some mistakes - such as "[a] portrait", if that's what you meant.
  • Don't sandwich text between images and a side-bar quote
    •  Done
  • Why does the coat of arms have no caption to explain it?
    •  Done
  • Avoid copying the description of an image in the caption
    • Which image's caption is copied from the description? Some captions are so simple that it's hard to reword them (eg. images in "Queen of Hungary and Bohemia" section).
      • The one involving the colour of her clothing is a direct translation of the description
        • I've removed that sentence altogether. It was unsourced and not really important.
  • Not required, but it would be helpful to translate some of the image description pages into English
    •  Done
  • File:Kasteel van Binche.JPG has the wrong licensing tag - this is a photo of a 2D work of art, therefore the photographer does not hold copyright
    • How can I fix that? Am I allowed to change the licensing tag myself?
      • Yes, you are, so long as you explain your reasoning either in your edit summary or on the talk page.
        •  Done