Talk:Scipione Piattoli/GA1

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

Reviewer: Madalibi (talk · contribs) 03:20, 6 November 2012 (UTC)


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

This is a nice piece of work that is close to GA status, but a few shortcomings need to be addressed before it can be promoted. The main theme of my comments is clarity.
 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * The lead section is sometimes difficult to follow. Readers who know little about Polish history may not understand the significance of the people and events mentioned. Instead of asking readers to click on links several times per sentence, brief characterizations of these people and events should be added to the text. The last paragraph of the lead needs most work: "He was involved in the Kościuszko Insurrection [what was that?]. After the third partition of Poland [in XXXX year], he was interned by the Austrians [what were they doing there?] for several years, together with [who was that?] Hugo Kołłątaj. Freed in 1800, he worked several years with [who was that?] Adam Jerzy Czartoryski in the service of Russia, before retiring to Courland [where is that and why did he go there?]."
 * I tried to expand the lead, let me know if it is better now. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 18:28, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
 * This is much clearer, thank you! Madalibi (talk) 01:30, 7 November 2012 (UTC)
 * "Historiography" is a one-sentence section. "In fiction" could also be simplified to one sentence. Since neither section has much chance of being expanded, would you consider merging them and moving them to the lead, where they would form a nice last paragraph?
 * Agreed, merged and added a sentence regarding the recently added picture. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 18:28, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
 * I merged the three sentences into one paragraph that I put at the end of the lead. I think they make for a nice conclusion on Piattoli's legacy, but feel free to revert if you don't think they belong there. Madalibi (talk) 01:30, 7 November 2012 (UTC)
 * In the same spirit of enhancing the opening paragraphs, could you think of a way to integrate Enlightenment in Poland to the lead instead of confining it to "See also"?
 * Done. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 18:28, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
 * The article has 11 red links. Is every red link to a person or institution that is presumed notable? Are Piattoli's father, mother, and brother, for instance, all worthy of a potential article? If not, they should probably be delinked. Could the nominator go through the red links to confirm that they can all eventually have their own page, and delink them if not?
 * I assume they are all notable. His family members are mentioned in one source as painters, and those usually are notable. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 18:28, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Good, no problem! Madalibi (talk) 01:30, 7 November 2012 (UTC)
 * And a few matters of style:
 * Could you be more specific about what "a rather secular lifestyle" means?
 * Added a quote to the source, it does not go into any detail, just uses that phrase.
 * "involved in political activism": "involved" appears 9 times in the article and sounds vague every time. Replacing it with more specific verbs like "participated in," "frequented," "organized," etc., would make the prose more lively.
 * Tweaked a few.
 * "...a brochure Saggio...": change to either "the brochure Saggio" or "a brochure titled (or 'called') Saggio"
 * Done.
 * Who was Piotr Potocki? Could you specify how a former Italian priest (or professor) become a pupil to Potocki's sons? Did Piattolie resign when he already knew he would become a preceptor, or did he first resign and then contacted by Potocki?
 * I don't have access to the PSB article right now; no other source is very specific on this. Added a note PP was a mangate of the Potocki family. states that PP hired SP based on unspecified third party reference (unspecificed in the snippet I can see).
 * Since Maria Radziwiłł is a red link and she is not obviously linked to the Potocki family, could you explain briefly who she was (by adding a short modifier) so that the reader can understand how a personal disagreement with her could affect Piattoli's service at the Potocki household?
 * She was most likely a friend of the Potocki family, but at this point I can't verify this. Abridged entry here mentiones disagreements with aunt and grandmother of the boys. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 19:44, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
 * "In the meantime": do you mean while he was still serving the Potockis or after he split from them?
 * I probably meant "around that time", as the source was most likely not clear on the specific time frame, neither. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 19:44, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
 * "became associated" and "became a friend" are not grammatically parallel, so we can't have "became associated... and a friend...": maybe "associated himself" [would still have to explain what this "association" meant] followed by "became a friend"
 * "Henryk Lubomirski": who was he (son, nephew, cousin)?
 * Ummm. A child in the Lubomirski family, I think the text is clear here? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 19:44, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
 * "During his three-year stay in Paris, in the Lubomirskis' residence there, he was in touch with": "in the Lubomirskis' residence there" sounds awkward after "in Paris."
 * Fixed. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 19:44, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
 * "many people of the Age of Enlightenment": maybe something richer like "many important men of the Age of Enlightenment"
 * I had to follow the link to realize that Gilbert du Motier, marquis de Lafayette is a single page: insert semi-colons between the elements of the enumeration?
 * "From the notable Polish figures": I'm not sure who those are
 * C/e-ed. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 20:01, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
 * "Became associated": vague
 * C/e-ed. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 20:01, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
 * "throughout his life": Piattoli's life or Czartoryski's life?
 * C/e-ed. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 20:01, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
 * "Through his contacts...": where and when are we talking about, here?
 * C/e-ed. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 20:01, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
 * "Piattoli, having strong ties": I would prefer "Piattoli, who had strong ties"
 * "much of this": find a stronger formulation?
 * C/e-ed. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 20:01, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
 * "In the period between 1790 and 1792": just "Between 1790 and 1792"?
 * "resident of the Royal Castle in Warsaw": on what year did he come back from Paris?
 * At this point, and with the few sources available to me, not a clue, sorry. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 20:01, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
 * The phrase "winning the King over to" appears twice in three sentences. Maybe you could change the second one to "played a role in convincing the king to collaborate"?
 * "creche": did the original have "crèche"?
 * Don't know. I'd prefer the original French spelling, which was probably used by Poniatowski, too. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 20:01, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
 * "the vote": does this refer to a vote at the legislative assembly or to some other vote?
 * C/e-ed. --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 20:01, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
 * "Soon afterward": a more specific date would be preferable. "Later in the same year"?
 * Later that month is the best I can do, I can't find any good day date for this. --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 20:01, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
 * During the War in Defence of the Constitution: specify the year
 * C/e-ed. --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 20:01, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Commonwealth defeat: Commonwealth's defeat?
 * C/e-ed. --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 20:01, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
 * "officially parted ways": I understand that the letter officially put an end to their relation, but do we know who initiated the split?
 * Not based on the sources I have with me. --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 20:01, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
 * After the failure of the uprising: not clear what uprising this refers to, since none is mentioned.
 * C/e-ed. --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 20:01, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
 * "increasingly more involved": increasingly involved
 * "Around that time Piattoli, together with Czartoryski": "Around that time he and Czartoryski" would feel smoother
 * "involved with Courland's educational system": involved is too vague
 * I am afraid I can't be more specific with the sources I have. --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 20:01, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
 * We are told that Piattoli retired to Courland, but died in Altenburg, yet there is no mention of his move to Altenburg: could you clarify this issue, perhaps by mentioning when (or why?) Piattoli moved there?
 * Not based on the sources I have with me. --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 20:01, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
 * "He died, with a lung infection": unclear if he died of something else while he had a lung infection, or if he died of a lung infection.
 * C/e-ed. --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 20:01, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
 * "in the park": was there only one park in Löbichau?
 * I have no clue... again, would need sources. Won't have them till December. --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 20:01, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
 * One general comment on prose: the sentence structure tends to be redundant. "In 17XX he did this. In 17XX he became that. He... He... He..." This is probably fine for GA, but I think the prose would not be engaging enough for FA status.
 * I am sure you are right, but this is the best I can do. I am not a native English speaker, so beautiful prose is not something I can bring to the table. --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 20:01, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
 * You're too humble, and the prose looks much better already! Madalibi (talk) 01:30, 7 November 2012 (UTC)
 * You're too humble, and the prose looks much better already! Madalibi (talk) 01:30, 7 November 2012 (UTC)


 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * Not many sources are used, but that's because very few are available on Piattoli's life. These few sources are well deployed to create a clear chronological narrative, so no problem here. The only thing missing to fulfill criterion 2a is a reference for this sentence:
 * Due to his association with the reformers, in conservative Rome he became infamous as a staunch supporter of revolutionary ideals and was accused of "democratism".
 * The sentence was referenced as part of another sentence, then split. I restored the reference (see revisions from January if needed). --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 18:28, 6 November 2012 (UTC)


 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * I have no independent way to tell if major aspects of Piattoli's life have been omitted, but the wiki's main editor combed Rostworowski for information, and Rostworowski is the main biographical source on Piattoli, so no problem here either.
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * Clean, even-handed treatment. Nothing to say here.
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars, etc.:
 * No problem.
 * 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):
 * Apart from the portrait of Piattoli in the infobox, not a single image accompanies the text. While images are not obligatory, they are one of the strengths of Wikipedia, so it would be too bad not to take advantage of that strength here. I suggest adding pictures of places where Piattoli lived or of people he served, with captions explaining their significance in Piattoli's life.
 * Added another relevant painting. --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 18:28, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * Once these problems are addressed (redlinks, minor issues with prose clarity, more info for the uninformed reader in the lead, and a few relevant images), this will definitely pass to GA status! Cheers, Madalibi (talk) 03:20, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
 * PROMOTED. All the issues raised have been addressed very efficiently, so I'm glad to promote this article to GA status. Cheers, and congratulations on a job well done! Madalibi (talk) 01:30, 7 November 2012 (UTC)