Talk:Rhine campaign of 1795/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Gog the Mild (talk · contribs) 20:09, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

Some slightly random first thoughts:

Sources:

• Bertaud. Does this not have an ISBN?
• Ditto Rothenberg.
• Ersch. An ISBN in 1889? An orig-year needed perhaps?
• Dup links: Wurttenburg, Rhine Falls, ah, and several others. Could you check please?

• I'm not finding any more dupe links---my dupe link highlighter doesn't show any more.

• "or water borders with her" Which states do you think fall into this category? (Which you don't subsequently list.)
• Could you define Ancien Régime and levée en masse on first mention.
• "to such sizable, well-defined territories as Bavaria and Prussia." What was "well-defined" about Prussia? The map in the article would suggest otherwise.
• The first paragraph of "Geography" does not seem relevant to the article. Could you explain what I am missing? (Or delete it.)
• "In the 1790s, this part of the river was wild and unpredictable and armies crossed at their peril." Could you specify whether "this part of the river" refers to the delta mentioned in the previous sentence or to everything below the knee.

• fixed

• "control of the Upper Danube or any point in between". In between what (or where)?
• I have made a few minor changes. Could you check them please?
• "who were encamped outside the Mannheim fortress and drove them from their encampment outside the city into camp and forced to retreat either into the city of Mannheim or to join other forces in the region." I am a little confused by this. Specifically by the French being driven "from their encampment... into camp". Is "camp" a separate location to "encampment"?
• "Clerfayt concluded an armistice with the French... At the end of the campaign, the two sides had called a truce..." Was the truce separate from the armistice, or is this two references tot he same event?
• "He then laid siege to the French troops who sought safety inside." Possibly a continuation of the point above; would that be "inside" Mannheim or the camp?
• "The 10,000-strong French garrison, commanded by Anne Charles Basset Montaigu surrendered." Is the date of the surrender known?
• Bavaria and Saxony are listed as belligerents in the infobox, but are not mentioned elsewhere,

• I've done all the above. auntieruth (talk) 15:39, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

• "the Army of the Sambre and Meuse"; "the Army of Sambre and Meuse". I am not sure if RSs mostly use the definite article (sources I have do) but usage should be consistent.
• There is a lengthy section on the French experience of the campaign, but nothing on the Austrian's. Even if they explicitly learnt nothing, this should be mentioned.
• Are there no records of the casualties suffered during the campaign?

Gog the Mild (talk) 17:36, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

• for campaign casualties, I'd have to add up the individual guesses in Smith. For Austrian experience, I'll check my sources again, but I think I decided it would require OR. I'll check again. auntieruth (talk) 15:39, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

• If it's not in the sources, then it's not it the sources. I was just a little surprised. The Revolutionary War conflicts usually have reasonable estimates for casualties. Gog the Mild (talk) 16:31, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

• I can add up the material in Smith, but yes, otherwise it is surprising. Actually, I might find it on Bodart. I'll have a look. Otherwise, everything is covered. auntieruth (talk) 19:18, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

• Bodart only lists 2100 casualties for the sieges at Mannheim and Mainz. auntieruth (talk) 19:22, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

OK. I will let you have "well defined" for Prussia. I'll pick it up at ACR . But could you revisit the two issues in tq above? Thanks. Also, I have tweaked some of your new wording, could you check it for me? It's looking pretty good - nice work. Gog the Mild (talk) 19:55, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

Hi auntieruth. The strike through wasn't ended, so I am not sure if you have seen the comments below. Gog the Mild (talk) 10:40, 28 September 2018 (UTC)

A last run through.

• I have made some more changes. Could you flag up any you are not happy with.
• "this became especially important in the rainy autumn of 1796". Do you mean 1795? If not, what is the relevance?

And then we are done. Gog the Mild (talk) 19:31, 27 September 2018 (UTC)

Good stuff. I'm signing off and look forward to seeing this at ACR. Gog the Mild (talk) 08:30, 29 September 2018 (UTC)

Good Article review progress box Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV () 3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant () Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed