Talk:Filippo Paulucci/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Reviewer: Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk · contribs) 11:05, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

Will get to this shortly. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk &bull;&#32;mail) 11:05, 14 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Section 1.1;
 * Name of subject's father, should be mentioned at the start. Also mention the full name
 * and after the death of his father Giuseppe in 1785, was admitted beyond the pages of the King of Sardinia; the whole sentence is pretty confusing. In some cases it may be taken that Giuseppe was admitted. Please break it different sentences. I suggest "Filippo was the fifth of the eight sons of the couple. After the death of his father in 1785, Filippo was admitted beyond the pages of the King of Sardinia
 * Done


 * Be consistent in using "Paulucci" or "Filippo", use the last name, per WP:LASTNAME
 * Link sublieutenant
 * Done


 * prisoner exchange? only one prisoner, I think it must be a sort of "prisoners exchange"
 * Done


 * After the occupation of the Turin Citadel; What is Turin Citadel? A place, who occupied it?
 * Done. I changed it, because the important notion is the occupation of Turin, not of its Citadel.


 * "After the occupation of the Turin Citadel" "he was convicted for challenging to a duel a French officer to defend the honour of the Piedmont"; this sentence is vague. There is no flow between the former and latter sentences. Who is trying the defence the honour of the Piedmont, the French officer or Filippo? If Filippo was trying to defend the honour, why was he convicted. If it was the french officer, why was Filippo trying to break the honour
 * Done.


 * and removed by the king; why was he removed and from what capacity
 * Done


 * awarded him the Knight's Cross; for which battle?
 * Done


 * Link General
 * Done


 * and, the following year, took no part in the war against Napoleon; delete this entire sentence. If he did not take part in the war, there is no need to mention
 * Done


 * Section 1.2;
 * He moved to the Russian service; Replace "He" with the last name
 * Done


 * moved to the Russian service; any specific reason why he moved to Russian service, leaving the previous one
 * Done


 * Link colonel
 * Done


 * He took part in the war against the Turks in 1810 and was appointed quartermaster of the Caucasian Army in 1811, then governor of Georgia, where he simultaneously had to wage a war against the Turks (from Kars), against the Persians (Karabakh) and insurgents; this sentence is too long, and in the end it becomes vague to a reader. Break it.
 * Done


 * post as "of the" governor general
 * Done


 * Section 1.3;
 * king Carlo Felice -> King Carlo Felice
 * Done


 * When, after After the constitutional revolution in 1821
 * Done


 * the Austrian Empire has made political manouvres to exclude Carlo Alberto from the succession line, in hope to substitute him with Francesco IV d'Asburgo-Este, Paulucci encountered, during one of his Italian licence periods, Carlo Felice in Turin, and his later efforts at the Russian court were essential to stopping the Austrian ambitions at the Verona's congress; this sentence is again vague, I couldn't catch the meaning.
 * Done


 * After the coup d'etat that, in France, brought Louis Philippe d’Orléans to power, Carlo Felice was eager to reinforce his army; what is the coup in France and abput their king is pulled in here. What is the relation to Carlo Felice to reinforce if Louis Philippe d’Orléans came to power. Also the former phrases are not in grammatical order. Please correct them.
 * Done


 * giving him, on the 28 June 1830, the ranks of full general and Inspector general of Infantry and Cavalry -> giving him, the ranks of full general and Inspector general of Infantry and Cavalry on the 28 June 1830
 * Done


 * He was all but welcomed by the army
 * Done


 * march 1831; initial capitals for march. It is to be "March 1831"
 * Done


 * died in Nice the on 25 January 1849
 * Lead and infobox;
 * The lead needs expansion upto atleast two paras for an article of this length.
 * Done


 * dup links
 * Piedmont; section 1.3, para 1, sentence 1
 * full general; section 1.3, para 3, last sentence
 * Modena; ; section 1.3, para 5
 * Done — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lord Ics (talk • contribs) 16:14, 30 April 2017 (UTC)


 * References;
 * All these books which are not used for citing the prose, are need not be mentioned.
 * I delete the first book cited: the Marquis Paulucci it mentions couldn't be Filippo Paulucci. I would like to move this section to the talk page: the books in it could be useful for further article's expansion.


 * 8.3% confidence, violation unlikely.
 * Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk &bull;&#32;mail) 04:45, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
 * On Wikipedia and its sister projects, never delete the comments in discussion. Whatever it is, be it a GA review, FA review or other discussion, even though they are address. Just put "Done" with under the comment to indicate that you have addressed the comment, so that the reviewer can check it. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk &bull;&#32;mail) 15:32, 30 April 2017 (UTC)
 * I beg your pardon, it wasn't my intention causing so much trouble. I thank you for your kindness and patience. Edited as you suggest. Regards, Lord Ics (talk) 15:45, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

Status query
Krishna Chaitanya Velaga, Lord Ics, what is the current status of this nomination? The review was put on hold on April 29, this page was last edited on April 30, and the most recent edit to the article was on May 2. It would be great if this review could progress. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 05:55, 16 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Oh, sorry for that. Almost missed this one, good to go. --Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk &bull;&#32;mail) 06:16, 16 June 2017 (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, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):  d (copyvio and plagiarism):
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars, etc.:
 * 1) 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):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk &bull;&#32;mail) 06:16, 16 June 2017 (UTC)
 * 1) 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):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk &bull;&#32;mail) 06:16, 16 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk &bull;&#32;mail) 06:16, 16 June 2017 (UTC)