Talk:Nadezhda Stasova

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:Nadezhda Stasova/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: SusunW (talk · contribs) I'll take this one. For the record, I am slow and meticulous. I view the review process as a collaboration and conversation to improve the article. Please feel free to disagree with my comments. (also, I am in Mexico CST, so you'll have an idea of when I am active or not.) 15:40, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for reviewing! No rush at all. I'll see if I can get the offline sources back from the library so I have them to hand during the process. —Ganesha811 (talk) 16:10, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

Photos

• Something is off with the lede photo being published before 1895? Made, clearly, but publishing could not have happened before the organization that published it was even founded. Footnote 13 p 372 here, shows the organization was founded in 1905 (officially in 1907) and was suppressed in October 1917. Thus the publishing date is not 1895 but rather in the range between 1907 and 1917. (were it me, I would document the date range for the publisher, the All-Russian League for Women's Equality, with the source). It seems to me that the licensing should be {{PD-RusEmpire}} rather than author's life, since we don't know who took the photo and it is quite clear that an organization banned in October 1917, published the image before 7 November 1917. US tag is fine. SusunW (talk) 15:57, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

  That seems sensible! I've adjusted the licensing on Commons accordingly and added the dates that the original publisher was extant. —Ganesha811 (talk) 16:17, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

Lede

• Born into a noble and wealthy family, she eventually dedicated herself to activism. I would lose eventually. Everyone eventually dies, but we wouldn't say that. Also you should say what kind of activism, i.e. focused on women's education and well-being.

• Fixed as suggested.

• Alongside Anna Filosofova and Maria Trubnikova, Stasova was one of the leaders of the first organised Russian women's movement. Together, the three were referred to as the "triumvirate".[2][3] The lede should not contain information that is not cited in the body and should be free of citations entirely, except in the case of an exceptional claim. None of this appears to be exceptional, thus, citations should be removed. The material should be cited in the body, as I note there is no mention of the Russian women's movement in the body, Filosofova's first name isn't given in the body, neither she nor Trubnikova are linked in the body, and while the word triumvirate appears in the body, it does not state that that was how the women were commonly called.

• Hopefully fixed: I've made adjustments to the lead and to the first paragraph of 'Career'. Let me know if it looks acceptable now! —Ganesha811 (talk) 17:50, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

• looks fine. SusunW (talk) 18:27, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

• In her final years, she continued to support wasn't this more likely "Throughout her life, she supported"?

• Comment: no, I intended that to describe her activities after being forced out of the Bestuzhev courses in 1889.

• Fine. SusunW (talk) 18:27, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

• Remove citation from dob/dod in lede. You should also add her dob, 12 June 1822, which is cited by Muravyeva on p. 526. (Date and citation also need to be added to the body.

• Added, good spot!

Section clear SusunW (talk) 13:57, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

Sourcing

General comments: All refs appear to be RS and independent. Consistency of citations needs to be addressed (not a GA criteria, but will be if you intend to take it to FA: ISBN segmenting has meaning, different segments indicate when, who, language, specific work, etc. On-line converters are helpful. MOS:TITLECAPS indicates English titles should be in title case. Again on-line converter is helpful. I am not wiki-technical so if there are wiki functions that do this, I don't know of them. Location of publisher is haphazardly stated.)

• Fixed: I believe these issues have now both been addressed - thanks for the link to the online title case tool, it was useful! —Ganesha811 (talk) 21:37, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

• page numbering should, in the source citation, include ranges if you are using chapters, but should note specific pages in the in-line citation, you can do that by using {{rp|#}} at the end of your reftag.

Versions of sources I used to check copyvio. (You may not be able to access without removing .mx) Numbers refer to Special:PermanentLink/1188157079.

1. Ruthchild (2010)

2. Rappaport

3. Engel pp 49-61 missing from source citation

• Fixed: added.

4. Ruthchild (2009)

5. Muravyeva ( – via Project Muse (subscription required) )

6. Stites version I can access does not include this page. AGF.

7. Zelnick

8. Kaufman version I can access does not include this page. AGF.

9. Mardilovich & Taroutina (eds) No page number given. Unless the description appears in the introduction or prefix, we really should know who authored the article, but I totally get that that may not be possible in an e-book. If the version you have does not contain a page number, it should be cited by substituting for page= "|loc=Search phrase "Repin drew her portrait"|"

::* Fixed? - I believe I've done this as you intended, but let me know if that's not what you had in mind. —Ganesha811 (talk) 21:18, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

• Fixed - never mind, found the chapter and page number and added them! —Ganesha811 (talk) 21:32, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

10. Johanson page range for chapter missing, i.e. 28-50, from source citation  – via De Gruyter (subscription required)

• Fixed: added.

11. doi:10.1007/978-1-349-12704-7 chapter=Stasova, Nadezhda  – via Springer Link (subscription required) p. 515

Section cleared SusunW (talk) 14:05, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

Early life

• Replace Rappaport citation with Muravyeva, p 526 and give full date of birth.

• Fixed: Added Muravyeva. As that source doesn't have her location of birth, I've left in Rappaport.

Date here is given in European style, which is technically correct, but your other dates are in US style. They should be consistent. I prefer ddmmyy, but it doesn't matter, as long as they are consistent throughout. There's a tool for that, but I'm not even sure if I had to install a gadget to do it. Go into edit and then look in the tools drop down near the bottom. I can do it, if you don't have the option that says "DATES to dmy", "DATES to mdy", etc. SusunW (talk) 14:23, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

Fixed: dates adjusted.

• You mention only her father's name, which seems odd given that we know per Muravyeva, p 526 that her mother was Mariia Abramovna Suchkova, daughter of a military officer. Were it me, I would not hide her mother's identity.

• Fixed: added.

Thanks. I hate for women to be written out of history. It's a "thing" with me, call their names. Need to add the page for Muravyeva, p 526 SusunW (talk) 14:23, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

Fixed: page # added.

• godchild appears on page 75, add page #

• Fixed: added.

• she had five brothers... info on Vladimir (V.V.) and Sofia appears on pp 75-76. I see no mention of Dmitry, but his relationship is confirmed in Muravyeva, p 526. Add page #s and citation.

• Fixed: added.

• Died of cholera is on p. 75, as is the information about her family's thoughts on girls' education. Add page # to both citations.

• Fixed: added.

• While her family thought educating girls was not the same as for boys, they did provide her with instruction and I think that should be mentioned. Muravyeva, p 526 says she studied languages (English, French, German, and Italian), music, art, literature, history, and social skills.

• Fixed: added.

• Lose "Nevertheless" and add page numbers, i.e. Ruthchild p. 75 and Muravyeva p. 526

• Fixed: adjusted.

• As a young woman should probably say after she was 25 (source says "in her late twenties". Dating is important because it makes it clearer later down that she spent a significant portion of her life abroad.)

• Fixed: adjusted.

• However, shortly before their wedding, lose "however", fiancé refers to a man (ée is a woman), insert p. 75

• Fixed: added.

• never marry insert p. 75

• Fixed: added.

• died of consumption in 1858 appears on p. 76, but it also says that the death made her "return to St. Petersburg". She couldn't very well return if she hadn't left, so where was she? Aha! Rappaport, p 671 says she was living abroad until 1858, so probably around a decade was spent as a carer for her sister, which IMO is significant and needs to be added along with the fact that she returned.

• Fixed: added some detail - let me know if the phrasing needs tweaked. —Ganesha811 (talk) 21:24, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

Looks good to me. SusunW (talk) 14:23, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

• "universal family" insert page 671 for Rappaport and page 76 for Ruthchild.

• Fixed: added.

Actually page numbers aren't showing here. (You could just move them from the end of the previous sentence. It is not necessary to cite every single sentence if the sourcing used is exactly the same. To me it is redundant but to many editors here they like that. Your call, but we do need page #s.) SusunW (talk) 14:23, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

Fixed - moved them from prior sentence.

Comment, no apparent copyvios in this section. SusunW (talk) 19:50, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

All comments in section addressed. SusunW (talk) 16:12, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

Career

• Salon is discussed on p. 76, add page #

• Fixed: added.

• triumvirate needs page #s: Ruthchild p. 12, Muravyeva p. 527, Engel pp. 57-58

• Fixed: added.

• organized feminist movement needs page #s: Ruthchild p. 12, Rappaport p 672

• Fixed: added.

• Following in 1859 add page #s: Rappaport p 671, Ruthchild p. 76

• Fixed: added.

• Please look again at the section between The group had two factions and leading the "Russians". I see that the Society for Inexpensive Lodgings (which is what Engel calls it) had two factions, but don't see the "German party" and the "Russian party" in any of the sources, nor anything about "giving to institutions" as opposed to "direct aid". Engel says on pages 58-59 merely that the conservative faction believed in monitoring beneficiaries, but the more liberal triumvirate members did not. Perhaps there is another source that gives this information?

• Modified: that information comes from Ruthchild, which is cited earlier in the paragraph. I've adjusted the cites and added page numbers.

I see that now that you have added the page numbers. Note in the first sentence, which ends which differed on their preferred approach you need to insert Ruthchild p. 76

• 1861 charter needs page #s: Engel p 59, Ruthchild p. 76

• Fixed: added.

• housing and daycare are both on Engel p. 59 and both need the page # inserted.

• Fixed: added.

• Stasova and her sister-in-law Who is her sister-in-law? I see no reference to her (whoever she was) specifically. Zelnik p. 154 says "N. V. Stasova and other representatives of the progressive St. Petersburg intelligentsia" and Rappaport p 671 says Stasova "founded a women's Sunday School". Okay, I see that s-i-l is Polixena Stasova and her involvement is confirmed in Muravyeva p. 527 Page numbers need to be added, s-i-l needs a name, and additional citation for Muravyeva needs to be added.

• Fixed: all added!

• closed in 1862 needs page # 154 inserted.

• Fixed: added.

• teaching at home, add page # 527

• Fixed: added.

• Sorry, real life conflict. I'll come back to it tomorrow and also review your answers. SusunW (talk) 23:00, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

  We're in no rush and have already made great progress! See you in a little while. :) —Ganesha811 (talk) 23:06, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

I get that it's early in the dry season, but the wet is supposedly finished. We were totally unprepared for Chaac – 3 soaking wet cats and a massive leak in the skylight over the stove, which flooded the kitchen. Fortunately the plasterer is coming today to reseal the roof and everything is now dry. Sky is blue, no clouds and it's 24° C/75° F, so hopefully he can get it repaired. SusunW (talk) 14:42, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

Sounds like gorgeous weather, it's a pity it came on the back of flooding! It's been a grey and typical November/December in my part of the world. —Ganesha811 (talk) 15:36, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

Typical weather for here. Sun shining (even in the rainy season) 27-38°C/80-100°F except in May when it is really hot. I could not live where it was gray and definitely won't anywhere that it snows or is below 24° C /75° F. Done it, not my cup of tea. SusunW (talk) 15:46, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

Resuming review:

• link to Kalinkin Hospital should be piped to the Russian article {{ill|Kalinkinskaya Hospital|ru|Калинкинская больница}}, which seems to be the common name for Russia's first venereology hospital.[1], [2], [3] I also note this work was carried out with "Countess/Princess Dondukova-Korsakova" (Muravyeva p. 527; Rappaport p. 671) {{ill|Maria Dondukova-Korsakova|ru|Дондукова-Корсакова, Мария Михайловна}} (I know, I know, but it's important, IMO) and the page #527 needs to be inserted.

Fixed: Thanks for the suggestions for interlanguage links, I've added those, as well as a bunch of page numbers throughout the remainder of the article. —Ganesha811 (talk) 15:58, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

• Muravyeva says only (p. 527) that a Publishing Cooperative was created in the 1860s. Rappaport p. 671 says in 1864 and with Alexander Engelhardt (not Anna). Ruthchild p. 78 says it was active from 1863 to 1879 but does not mention anyone other than the triumvirate. Unglow & Henry p. 515 confirms 1863 but doesn't include any partners. Need a citation which confirms Anna Engelhardt and the page #.

Hopefully fixed: Muravyeva confirms Anna Engelhardt in her entry, which I've added as a cite, and adjusted the other citations. —Ganesha811 (talk) 15:58, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

Comment, no apparent copyvios in this section, but I have no access to Kaufman, which AGF. SusunW (talk) 15:46, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

All comments in section addressed. SusunW (talk) 17:36, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

Higher Education

• created courses needs page #, Rappaport 671

• Fixed: added.

• direct quotations require a citation immediately following the quote, i.e. after "popular support" insert Johanson p. 37. Also fix her name, in the text you have en instead of on.

• Fixed: added.

• following Tolstoy, Johanson needs page #37 inserted

• Fixed: added.

• "Sheep" insert page for quote Johanson p. 38

• Fixed: added.

• Rejected the petition…Muravyeva p. 528 says he only approved the lectures on the order of the tsar, which I think is probably important.

• Fixed: added.

• overwhelmingly by women I see in Johanson but not in Muravyeva.

• Fixed: adjusted.

• Fix refs at limited set of courses Myravteva is 528, Rappaport is 671. (you might also list them, as Rappaport says "chemistry, history, anatomy, zoology, and Russian literature". Indeed a limited set of courses, but progress.)

• Fixed: added and adjusted.

• Another of her nieces seems out of place in this section, I would probably relocate it to "Early life" and just say "One of her nieces".

• Fixed: moved.

• organizing once more, organizing them once more? She isn't doing general rallying, but specific agitation for the courses, right?

• Hopefully fixed: adjusted the phrasing.

• direct quote of muddleheadedness needs specific citation to Rappaport p. 671

• Fixed: added.

• Reading Myravteva p. 528, the move to remove her had far less to do with her abilities than with a new government policy to strip educational facilities of their autonomy, i.e. to impose government standards upon the schools.

• Hopefully fixed: agreed, that was the intended point of the paragraph, but evidently unartfully phrased. I've added some material to make this more explicit. —Ganesha811 (talk) 17:41, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

Comment, no apparent copyvios in this section.

All comments in section addressed SusunW (talk) 17:40, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

Later career

• chair of the Society for Assistance reads oddly to me. She didn't create a chairmanship for the society, she helped the triumvirate create the society.

• Fixed: adjusted.

• one scholar name Rochelle Goldberg Ruthchild

• Fixed: added.

• You could do with adding a description of what the Russian Women's Mutual Philanthropic Society did. Rappoport needs insertion of p. 672.

• Fixed: added.

• I don’t see her specific death date in Ruthchild pp. 12-13. It is given in Muravyeva p. 529

• Fixed: added.

Comment, no apparent copyvios in section.

And that's a wrap. Thank you for your patience with me and for your work on the article. I enjoyed learning about her and appreciate your collaborative spirit. SusunW (talk) 17:28, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

I believe I've now addressed all your points. Thank you so much for the thoroughness of your comments - the article is much improved from where it was. —Ganesha811 (talk) 17:41, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

Checklist

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, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

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

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

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):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

It's been a pleasure to work with you. Give me a few minutes to finish passing the article. SusunW (talk) 17:56, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

Ditto! Thanks again. Couldn't have asked for a more helpful and thorough review. —Ganesha811 (talk) 20:18, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

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

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Bruxton talk 01:08, 7 December 2023 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

Stasova in 1889

• ... that at the end of her life, after a career fighting for women's rights in the Russian Empire, Nadezhda Stasova (pictured) wrote that Russian women "still have not learned to stop being men's slaves"? Source: Ruthchild, Rochelle G. (2010). Equality and Revolution. University of Pittsburgh Press. p.13 ISBN 978-0-8229-7375-1. "Stasova had recognized that women's liberation involved a lengthy struggle....'before they will achieve their liberation, many customs to remove.' "
  • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Nizza, Frankfurt

Improved to Good Article status by Ganesha811 (talk). Self-nominated at 18:30, 5 December 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Nadezhda Stasova; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.

• Newly promoted good article, long enough. All statements are sourced with inline citations and high-quality academic sources have been used. I have reviewed the Zelnik source as an example and assume good faith on the offline sources; there is no evidence of copyvio on Earwig. I note a thorough review of the sources has been done as part of the GA review. The hook is interesting and cited to a reliable source which I have reviewed via Google Books. The images used are correctly licensed and the painting by Repin is quite striking so I hope it will be used on the main page. QPQ is done. Thanks User:Ganesha811 for a very well written article on a highly interesting subject! ITBF (talk) 01:07, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

ITBF The hook is over the 200 character limit. It would be great if for DYK purposes the hook claim after a career fighting for women's rights in the Russian Empire was cited end of sentence - to comply with WP:DYKHFC. Bruxton (talk) 15:05, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

How about ... that close to the end of her life, feminist and educator Nadezhda Stasova (pictured) wrote that Russian women "still have not learned to stop being men's slaves"? —Ganesha811 (talk) 16:17, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

Cemetery source

@Gleb95, do we have a source for Stasova's burial at Tikhvin? I'm sure it's correct, but I'm having a hard time verifying the fact online and don't recall it in the print sources I've looked at. Thanks! —Ganesha811 (talk) 20:06, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Greetings. Her resting place has been recorded in Piryutko, Yuri M. [in Russian] (2011). "Некрополь мастеров искусств". In Kobak, Aleksandr V. [in Russian]; Piryutko, Yuri M. (eds.). Исторические кладбища Санкт-Петербурга (in Russian) (2nd ed.). Moscow: Centrpoligraf. p. 243. ISBN 978-5-227-02688-0. OCLC 812571864.

P. S. The earlier 2009 edition, nearly identical to the above, is available of sorts online. Gleb95 (talk) 07:08, 28 August 2024 (UTC).

Thank you very much, confirmed (Google Books has it!) and added to the article with the source you gave. —Ganesha811 (talk) 16:20, 30 August 2024 (UTC)