Wikipedia:Peer review/Maria Theresa of Austria/archive1

Maria Theresa of Austria
This peer review discussion has been closed. I've listed this article for peer review because I'd like fellow editors to help me improve this article furthermore. It's currently at Good Article status and I don't think it's far from FA. I'd like to see comments about articles in general and specifically about Maria Theresa of Austria section and Maria Theresa of Austria section. I would also appreciate advices on how to organize the article better, if that's possible; it's nearly impossible to organize the article in such way that events are mentioned purely chronologically. That might not even be an issue, as I see featured articles such as Elizabeth I of England which do not list events purely chronologically.

Thanks, Surtsicna (talk) 17:51, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Finetooth comments: You've done a lot of work on this interesting article about an unusual woman. I have quite a few suggestions for improvement. The main two would be to add more context for readers who know little about 18th-century European history and to add one or more maps. I read rather closely the lead and first few sections and less closely the later sections; I ran a script to change hyphens to en dashes in page ranges and date ranges, and I made some small proofing changes to the early sections. I did not check the image licenses, but the images do not look suspicious to me in that regard and are quite nice. The article is not ready for FAC in its present form, but I see no reason why it can't become ready. Here are my suggestions:

Lead
 * "She started her 40-year long reign... " - Tighten by deleting "long"?
 * "Maria Theresa promulgated financial and educational reforms, with the assistance of Count Friedrich Wilhelm von Haugwitz and Gottfried van Swieten, promoted commerce and the development of agriculture, and reorganised Austria's ramshackle military, all of which strengthened Austria's international standing, but refused to allow religious toleration." - Perhaps a bit too complex. Would two sentences be better? Maybe end the first one after "standing". The second could be "However, she refused to allow religious toleration, and contemporary travellers thought her regime was bigoted and superstitious."
 * "As a young monarch who had to fight two dynastic wars, she believed that her cause should be the cause of her subjects, but in her later years she came to understand that their cause must be hers." - This reads like a slogan, and I'd replace it. The phrase "came to understand" suggests that somehow this was the natural order of things. The phrase "had to fight" suggests that she had no choice.
 * I've changed the phrases "had to fight" and "came to understand" but the rest is how the source put it so I am not sure how I can rephrase it while keeping the original meaning. Any suggestions? Surtsicna (talk) 20:22, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Early life and background
 * "Charles sought the other European powers' approval for disinheriting his nieces." - Would it be good to briefly explain why any European powers would oppose this? Most readers will not have any idea why it would matter to France or Spain or Prussia or other place whether one of Charles' nieces or one of his daughters took his place.
 * It's explained already; he had previously agreed that his niece would succeed him should he have no son and broke the contract he had signed along with his father and brother. He needed his neighbours to approve that so that they wouldn't depose his daughter on the basis of his niece's superior right. Surtsicna (talk) 20:22, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, but my question is more basic than that? Why did the other powers give a hoot one way or the other? Finetooth (talk) 22:39, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Because the goal of every 18th century European country was to expand, to conquer. The War of the Austrian Succession is exactly what Charles tried to avoid by asking his neighbours for approval. He was afraid that disinheriting Maria Josepha and Maria Amalia would be used as a pretext for a war against Maria Theresa. Surtsicna (talk) 10:19, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
 * If "The goal of every 18th century European country was to expand, to conquer on virtually any pretext" could be worked into the text or into a note, I think it would help clarify what might seem to be truly odd or inexplicable behavior to readers who know next to nothing about 18th century Europe. That phrase would be a nice pithy way of putting it, if you can find a reliable source that says the same thing, more-or-less. Finetooth (talk) 16:18, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Marriage
 * "The letters she sent to him shortly before their marriage expressed her pathetical eagerness to see him; his letters, on the other hand, were stereotyped and formal." - The word would be "pathetic" rather than "pathetical", but I'd be inclined to delete it even if one or two critics put it this way. "Pathetic" seems unnecessarily harsh. Would "expressed her eagerness" be better?


 * "She was very jealous of her husband and his infidelity was the greatest problem of their marriage,[45][46] with Maria Wilhelmina, Princess of Auersperg, as his best known mistress." - "With plus -ing" is often not the best construction. Suggestion: "She was jealous of her husband, and his infidelity was the greatest problem of their marriage. Maria Wilhelmina, Princess of Auersperg, was his best-known mistress."


 * "In the summer of 1738, Austria suffered defeats during the ongoing Russo-Turkish War. The Turks reversed Austrian gains in Serbia, Wallachia and Bosnia. The Viennese rioted at the cost of the war. Francis Stephen was popularly despised, as he was thought to be a cowardly French spy." - I find this sequence confusing because it seems to suggest that Francis Stephen was somehow responsible for the Russo-Turkish War or Austria's role in it. Was he? If so, could the connection be made more clear? This leads to the thought that more background, perhaps in the form of note about the Bourbon-Hapsburg conflict and various alliances, might be helpful. Most readers will not know much about 18th-century European history and may easily become lost.

Accession
 * "the treasury contained only 100,000 florins" - Could florins also be expressed in contemporary U.S. dollars? Otherwise, it is just a number attached to a unit with a meaning unknown to most readers. Ditto for "gulden" later in the article.


 * "She dismissed the possibility that other countries might try to seize her territories and immediately started ensuring the imperial dignity for herself;[57] since a woman could not be elected Holy Roman Empress... " - I'm not sure readers will know what "imperial dignity" refers to. Also, I think it would be helpful here or perhaps earlier to explain (in a note if it will not fit neatly into the main text), what the Holy Roman Empire consisted of and what lands lay within the Hapsburg Empire at the time of Maria Theresa's accession. The land swaps (by treaty or war) seem quite complicated. A map or maps showing how Europe was divided would be helpful. Most readers will have no idea where Silesia is, for example. A map could show where the places mentioned in the article are in relation to one another. Another map could show how Europe looked at the beginning of Maria Theresa's reign and how it looked 40 years later.
 * I will try to find a map of lands ruled by Maria Theresa but I am not sure that we need maps for every province that's mentioned in the article. A reader can simply click on Silesia to find out where Silesia is. As for "imperial dignity", I thought that the rest of the sentence made it clear that it refers to the title of empress. Surtsicna (talk) 20:22, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I agree that individual maps of every province would be too much; I was hoping that a single map might exist on the Commons that would show all of them at about the right time in history. If nobody has already made such a map, perhaps someone could. Finetooth (talk) 22:46, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
 * File:Growth of Habsburg territories.jpg is one that might do except that its license information is incomplete; the original source is not identified. If the original source could be tracked down, and if the map is "free", the license could be fixed and the image used. Finetooth (talk) 23:09, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I believe I've found it. Here is the bibliographic data: " Muir, Ramsay (1911). Philips' New Historical Atlas for Students. London: George Philip & Son, Ltd." I found this information here. It would be nice to have the page number, but I haven't found that so far. WorldCat gives the full title as Philip's new historical atlas for students : a series of 65 plates, containing 154 coloured maps and diagrams, with an introduction illustrated by 43 maps and plans in black and white. See . The map can be licensed as free in the U.S. because it is pre-1923. The page number could be tracked down by obtaining a copy of the book from a library. Finetooth (talk) 23:33, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
 * It's not bad, but we should find one that's less confusing. This one shows lands ruled by the House of Habsburg and the House of Habsburg-Lorraine from 1282 until 1918. I'd make one myself but I don't know how to do it. Surtsicna (talk) 10:19, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, alas, I agree. I found the existing map somewhat confusing too, partly because it includes a lot of things that happened outside the reign of Maria Theresa and partly because it suffers from map clutter. I have made maps but none quite like this, and I'm not sure what could be used as a "free" base map. I could play around with the problem a bit just for fun, but it would be better, I think, if you requested a custom-made map from the people at Wikipedia's Graphic Lab and Map Workshop at WP:GL/MAP. Finetooth (talk) 16:44, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

War of the Austrian Succession
 * "Contrary to all expectations, a significant amount of support for the young Queen came from Hungary." - Why was that contrary to all expectations? Again, this seems to be a matter of context or background. Most readers will have no idea what the Hapsburg Empire consisted of, how Austria and Hungary were related, and why Hungarians might not support the Queen.

Seven Years' War
 * "Frederick's invasion of Saxony" - It wouldn't hurt to remind readers that this is Frederick of Prussia.

Family life Reforms
 * I'd consider moving this section to near the bottom, after "Late Reign" and before "Death and legacy''.
 * I thought about it too, since it refers to her grandchildren and events in 1767. But the section starts with events that took place in 1737 so I am not sure what to do. Surtsicna (talk) 20:22, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Since the subsections under this head are so short, I'd suggest merging them all and dropping the subheads. Ditto for one-sentence orphan paragraphs in this and other sections. I'd merge them with other paragraphs to prevent a choppy layout and to avoid over-emphasis on a single sentence.

Full title
 * I'd put this in a note in a "Notes" section rather than including it as part of the main text.

 References''
 * If you create a "Notes" section, the long notes in the reference section can go there as well as any new notes you care to add. There are multiple ways to create a "Notes" section. Voyage of the Karluk uses one that I happen to like.
 * The Manual of Style suggests using italics for emphasis rather than bolding except in special instances. WP:MOSBOLD has details.

Bibliography Other
 * " Browning, Reed: The War of the Austrian Succession Palgrave Macmillan 1995 ISBN 0312125615" - The punctuation in all of the listings looks odd to me because no punctuation separates the parts. I'm used to seeing "Browning, Reed (1995). The War of the Austrian Succession. Palgrave MacMillan. ISBN 0312125615. Also, I'm not sure what "Palgrave" refers to, and the place of publication is missing. WorldCat is often helpful in finding and verifying bibliographic data. All of the books should include place of publication.
 * The Manual of Style advises against creating text sandwiches between images or illustrations, against displacing heads or edit buttons with images, or in placing images that overlap two sections. There's a text sandwich in War of the Austrian Accession, another in Reforms, and another in Death and Legacy. Eliminating the subheads in the Reform section should help solve some of these problems; the others will require different solutions. Moving quotes in boxes into the main text, re-locating images, and shortening of captions are among the possibilities.


 * You might want to add alt text, meant for readers who can't see the images. The alt-text in the toolbox at the top of this page is handy in reviewing alt text. WP:ALT has details.


 * The dabfinder tool in the toolbox finds one dab in the article that should be fixed.

I hope these comments prove helpful. If so, please consider reviewing another article, especially one from the backlog at WP:PR. That is where I found this one. Finetooth (talk) 18:39, 6 July 2010 (UTC)