Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Blaise Pascal

Blaise Pascal
Self nom. Biography of an important figure in both math and religion. I think at this point it is fairly comprehensive. Christopher Parham (talk) 00:52, 2005 July 30 (UTC)


 * Support- well-written article. Flcelloguy | A note? | Desk 17:42, 30 July 2005 (UTC)
 * It's Featured quality, but I have things I don't like. (I.e. this is not an objection.)  I feel like the material mid-way through presents a chronology that isn't reflected in the narrative summary at the top.  Secondly, Pascal and Jansenism and the weird/scary politics of the Port Royal group is fascinating and under-represented here.  I know that the site biases toward science and math, and I know that Pascal is very important there, but the misery and fear and controversy around that episode is worth discussing in more and more patient detail. Geogre 21:39, 30 July 2005 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure I understood the first issue precisely, but I've tried to make the lead better reflect the chronology of his work, assuming this is what you meant. It seems like a bad idea to focus too much on dates, etc. in the lead though, so I'm not sure what else to do beside what is there.
 * Sorry for being imprecise. When I can be more precise, I'll list the concerns on the article's talk page, so you can address them away from FAC. Geogre 00:28, 31 July 2005 (UTC)


 * Regarding the second issue, I'll see what I can do tonight, although a lot of the Port-Royal events seem better covered in depth at Port-Royal or Jansenism. Is there any topic in particular you have in mind? Much thanks for taking a look, in any case. Christopher Parham (talk) 23:20, 2005 July 30 (UTC)
 * Well, Pascal had to walk a tightrope with Jansenism. People were 'suppressed' for it, pretty hard.  A small dose of the atmosphere and the inability of someone like him to be abroad and professing Jansenism (and consequently the widely held belief that he was secretly of that camp all along and never had religious fallings away), as well as a little explanation of why Jansenism was remarkable, would help flavor the presentation.  Then again, I bias that way.  Geogre 00:28, 31 July 2005 (UTC)


 * I've been a bad voter & wasn't clear, above. Support. Geogre 00:00, 4 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Support, a great article and all my concerns were addressed when it was on peer review. - SimonP 17:35, August 3, 2005 (UTC)
 * Support, well written --nixie 00:06, 4 August 2005 (UTC)