Talk:Order of Saint Hubert/GA1

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

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria


 * 1) Is it reasonably well written?
 * A. Prose quality:
 * B. MoS compliance:
 * 1) Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
 * A. References to sources:
 * B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
 * C. No original research:
 * 1) Is it broad in its coverage?
 * A. Major aspects:
 * B. Focused:
 * 1) Is it neutral?
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * No edit wars, etc:
 * 1) Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
 * A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
 * B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * No edit wars, etc:
 * 1) Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
 * A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
 * B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * Pass or Fail:

Reviewer: MisterBee1966 (talk) 09:30, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

review

 * I think the abbreviation St. needs to be explained. If possible rename the article to something using the un-abbreviated form of St. ✅
 * Why Bavarian in the tile name? I get the impression that it is a Berg (state), Electorate of the Palatinate and Bavarian order. Wouldn’t it be better to name it "Order of Saint Hubert" and explain that it severed multiple purposes/states?
 * Pre-emptive disambiguation. There is also Order of Saint Hubert (French) and probably Order of Saint Hubert (Hungarian).  It's ended up as Bavarian and most of the sources refer to it as a Bavarian order. Auntieruth55 (talk) 22:18, 17 March 2010 (UTC)


 * I'm a bit confused by your version of the article. The German article claims that Military Order of St. Hubert is a Order (honour) while your article initially gives the impression that this is a Military order or Order (organization) and then again also a Order (honour). I guess that it is both? Nevertheless I think this needs better distinction.
 * different distinctions in German. Actually, I didn't translate it from the German, but started from "scratch". It is all of the above, and made more confusing by its 600+ year history: it has changed over time.

***I looked at the box, and it really isn't suitable for this award. Auntieruth55 (talk) 18:10, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
 * It should be clearer now. Auntieruth55 (talk) 18:03, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Please make use of the Infobox Military Award template.
 * I will, but it was not always a military award. Auntieruth55(talk) 18:03, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Some citations like: Rudge, "Military Orders of St. Hubert." or Boulton, p. 605. are used multiple times. Please name them so that they are listed once only
 * I don't like the named templates. Auntieruth55 (talk) 18:03, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't like peanut butter. :-)
 * Okay, then I won't send you my famous cookies. ;)

Nice article, well done MisterBee1966 (talk) 14:44, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
 * link confraternal to Confraternity, if applicable ✅
 * Please add Umlaute to all occurances of Jülich ✅
 * "Initially the order appeared to be both a brotherhood (Bruderschaft) and a knightly brotherhood (Rittersbruderschaft)". Can you please link or explain what the differences are.
 * "...the victory of his knights at Linnach" are you sure about "Linnach". Linnich is close to Jülich which to me would make more sense. ✅
 * You are correct. I had fixed it in one place but not the other.
 * link Chivalric orders ✅
 * "Duchy of Liege" do you mean "Duchy of Liège"? ✅ It's fairly common in American English to use Liege.  But you're right, Liège is more correct.
 * The entire section "Succession problems of the House of Jülich" seems to be motivated by trying to explain why the order came into disuse??? Maybe put the motivations in the beginning?
 * Well, also explain how the order was first used, forgotten, then resurrected.Auntieruth55 (talk) 18:03, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
 * "Gerhard met Arnold in battle, at the village of Linnich, near Ravensburg in Westphalia" shouldn't that read "Gerhard met Arnold in battle, at the village of Linnich, in Ravensburg county in Westphalia"? The town of Ravensburg is not even close to Linnich ✅
 * can you please link provost to the correct disambiguated version. ✅ There isn't a proper article on this use of provost. so I didn't link to it, just explained it.
 * provide translation for In memoriam recuperatæ dignitatis avitæ ✅ (sort of--my Latin's not very good). Probably better than my
 * St. Hubert or Saint Hubert. You use both variants can you settle on one? ✅
 * Do you know who manufactured the order? How many were produced? I assume they were valuable
 * No. don't know that. Probably valuable, but have no further information. Found a similar one in a catalog for 8500$US.
 * Do you have a rough number of recipients?
 * No, not that either. did find some new info, though, in a Burke's peerage book (newly added, it looks like). Apparently the order is still in use by the sundry Wittelsbachs and Stuarts. Auntieruth55 (talk) 18:20, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
 * One more thing, sorry, Dukes of Gelder how is that defined? Dukes of Berg are from Duchy of Berg. But where are the Dukes of Gelder from? Is a Duke of Jülich a Duke of Gelder?
 * Dukes of Gelder are Dukes of Gelder (later called Gelderland, sometimes Guelder). There is family overlap. I've tried to explain it better, but it's really not within the scope of this article.
 * Try using the FixBunching template. I also have areas of white spaces on my browser here.
 * I tried that just now, and it was terrible. White spaces everywhere. Took it out.Auntieruth55 (talk) 16:11, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
 * done