Talk:Klemens von Metternich/GA2

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

Reviewer: DCI (talk · contribs) 00:25, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

I plan on reviewing this article within the coming week.  DCI  talk 00:25, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
 * As I will have many comments, I am more than willing to complete corrections myself, in case you're busy this week.  DCI  talk 18:46, 28 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Lead.
 * The opening sentence is quite long, but I am not sure we can do much about it.
 * I'm not sure about opening a sentence with "Soon after, however, he would be the foreign minister..." ✅
 * Change "at home" to "at this time". ❌ Clarified what I mean
 * Early life
 * Is the first name necessary?
 * Surely the alternative is "Metternich was born into the House of Metternich" ? - Jarry1250 [Deliberation needed] 00:32, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
 * He was the eldest son of the couple, having one elder sister"...could you change to but had one other sister''? ❌ but clarified
 * The statement about swimming and horse-riding seems out of place in this sentence. Perhaps you could say something to the effect that his education included athletic activities, as well. ✅
 * The second paragraph in this section contains a few sentences that need grammar checking and also a quick check to make sure they don't incorporate too many clauses. I do not understand the last sentence, about looking "at east," unless it's supposed to be "at ease."✅
 * Please include the name of the French minister interrogated by Metternich. If you can, also include the names of the legislators.  Was this, by any chance, the French turncoat Dumoriez?
 * It wasn't actually; it was a party sent to arrest him. The source does not name the Minister of War but it was non-contentiously Pierre de Ruel, marquis de Beurnonville, so I've added that in. How many commissioners accompanied him does for some reason look contentious; the French Wikipedia names four! - Jarry1250 [Deliberation needed] 00:32, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Marriage and the Congress of Rastatt.
 * Many of the most influential... This sounds wordy.  Why not change it to "influential British politicians?" ✅
 * Ambassador
 * Dresden and Berlin
 * What does the word "retiring" mean in this context? Was Frederick Augustus of Saxony withdrawn from the affairs of state?  Including a more detailed word or explanation might clarify this.  ✅
 * Foreign Minister
 * Detente with France
 * I'm not wild about this sentence: After returning to Austria Metternich witnessed Austria's defeat... ✅
 * ''When Napoleon was also asking after..." Is there a better way to word this? ✅
 * Congress of Vienna
 * Check for minor errors (e.g., aid instead of the correct aide).✅
 * Aachen, Teplice, etc.
 * Is this the best section name?
 * Meh, I'm not overly keen on it but it's designed to fit with the others without omission. - Jarry1250 [Deliberation needed] 00:32, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
 * captured by the allure of... Not sure about this wording.   ✅
 * Remaining sections
 * Although the article meets GA criteria, as explained below, I may add more comments here within the next few days to assist in making general corrections.

My major concern
My major concern is the first paragraph of Historical assessment. I understand that the comments in this paragraph are supposed to be from the point of view of an unfavourable historian, but unquoted phrases describing a "pointless" struggle and "a more enlightened chancellor" do not sound acceptable here on Wikipedia.

General comments/concerns

 * Section headers eventually become quite small and a little hard to differentiate between. I understand this is necessary given the additional level-two sections at the bottom, but it's just something I noticed.
 * There are more than a few redlinks in the page. Again, they're probably necessary, but it detracts from the overall appearance.
 * Sourcing is excellent.

GA checklist

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

This article is well-written and, with the exception of the errors outlined above, is ready to be listed as GA. In order to make A-class or FA, corrections will need to be made around the article, again as listed above, but I am ready to pass this as soon as my major concern is addressed.
 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * The article's prose is quite good, but there are a few things that ought to be revised a little.
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * 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:
 * I cannot pass the article until I receive feedback or see corrections on Historical assessment.
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars, etc.:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * I am impressed with this article, and am happy to pass it for GA.  DCI  talk 21:41, 29 January 2012 (UTC)
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * I am impressed with this article, and am happy to pass it for GA.  DCI  talk 21:41, 29 January 2012 (UTC)
 * I am impressed with this article, and am happy to pass it for GA.  DCI  talk 21:41, 29 January 2012 (UTC)