Talk:Adam Philippe, Comte de Custine/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Ceradon (talk · contribs) 11:19, 25 December 2014 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose, no copyvios, spelling and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

   Awaiting nominator response on these issues.

   Issue with lede section: Lede has: "Following Dumoriez's apparent treason, the Committee of Public Safety investigated him, but cleared him of involvement", but text has: "Custine was accused of treason, defended by Robespierre, who declared him an honest man who gave his country good service ("J’estime sa franchise, ce général a bien servi la patrie."), and cleared." The former makes it seem like the investigation cleared him; but the latter makes it seem like the investigation turned up evidence against him, there was a trial, at that trial he was defended by Robespierre and acquitted. (That's the messaging I'm getting.) Furthermore, you mentioned "Committee of Public Safety" in the lede, but there is no mention of it otherwise. Lede content should reflect the content of the article. If the article doesn't mention it, the lede can't either. Other wise, the lede is fine.

• Ok, I think I've fixed this. The Committee on Public Safety didn't have to have actual proof of anything, they could charge anyone.

1. In the article:

   — "Early in his childhood, Adam Philippe was destined for a career in the military." - This is editorializing.

• fixed

1. — "end of the campaign in Germany under Marshal Saxe." - The campaign of who?

• fixed

1. — "In 1758, he was a captain of dragoons." - Suggestion: "In 1758, he was named a captain of dragoons." or "By 1758, he was a captain of dragoons."

• fixed

1. — "During the Seven Years' War, he learned to admire the modern military organization of Prussia." - To what effect? Adding "which influenced his military style later" would suffice.

• fixed. nice addition.

1. — "The Duc de Choiseul created a regiment of dragoons for him, but he exchanged this regiment for a regiment of infantry, which was heading for America." Regiment and regiment and regiment, oh my!

• fixed. Yes, indeed, too many regiments.

1. — "embarked for the Colonies" - Suggestion: "embarked for the modern-day United States (then called the Thirteen Colonies)" or "embarked for the Thirteen Colonies" (there were many 'colonies' at that time.)

• fixed

1. — "participated in the campaigns" - Did they participate in all campaigns subsequent to 1780? Most? Some?

• fixed

1. — "proprietor of the Regiment de Rouergue" - Shouldn't all of Regiment de Rouergue be italicized, and not just "de Rouergue".

• not really. Regiment is the English word. régiment is the French word

1. — "of surplice money" - Could you clarify here please? I don't believe you were talking about "liturgical vestments" which is what you linked to.

• Ah, yes. well, it was part of the August decrees, which meant eliminated the requirement of Frenchmen to pay for the surplice monies of the church. It was a big chunk of change for them and an important element of the Decrees.

1. — "defended by Robespierre" - who is Robespierre? (I know you linked, but "Robespierre, a French lawyer and Revolutionary figure", would suffice. It's less vague.)

• fixed

1. — " This occurred during Charles François Dumouriez's treasonous collaboration with the Austrians, which damaged the reputation of all the generals." - "the Austrians" Which Austrians? Government, military, puppies? "all the generals" - Which generals? French generals? Austrian generals? Some other generals? Every single serving general in the armies of the day. (If the latter is the case, that's one hell of a collaboration.) And damaged their reputations in the eyes of whom? The people? Their subjugates in the military? The government? Suggestion: "This occurred during Charles François Dumouriez's treasonous collaborations with [the] Austrian _____________, which, upon its discovery, brought down the suspicions of _______________ upon the generals of ______________."

• fixed. Clarified, added some info, which should help too.

1. — "and cleared" - I believe this should be something like: "and got him cleared of his charges." or "and he was cleared."?

• fixed

1. — "but also there was revolt in the Vendée over conscription into the army, resentment of the Civil Constitution of the Clergy and the French king had just been executed" - "but also there was" → "but there was also" (or maybe just "but there was"). There should be semi-colons, not commas, between "army" and "resentment" and "Clergy" and "and" for the sake of clarity and ease of reading.

   — "the new Army of the North ." - (a) There shouldn't be a space between "North" and the period; and (b) all other instances of military units are italicized. Why isn't this instance of "Army of the North"?

   — "to insure the cooperation" - Should be "ensure".

   — "feared representatives on mission" - "representatives on mission" are italicized no time before this. Should they be? If not, why is this italicized?

• I have no idea. fixed.

1. — Niderville (doesn't exit) should be Niderviller; François-Henri Lenfrey can be delinked.

• fixed

1. — "which combines faience production techniques with a created by the addition of crushed limestone with the clay." - Nonsensical.

• yes, it was. fixed.

1. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

   — Ref 5 say "pp. 570&ndash572." - Please correct this.

• fixed

1. — Otherwise, referencing checks out.

2. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

3. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

4. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

5. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.

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

6. Overall:

   Despite the flaws I pointed out, the article is exceptionally well written, with engaging prose and interesting use of literary devices. After the errors above are addressed, it would be my pleasure to pass this article. --ceradon (talk • contribs) 23:52, 25 December 2014 (UTC)

   Pass/Fail: