Talk:Belgium in the long nineteenth century/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Diannaa (talk · contribs) 16:04, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

Hi Brigade Piron. Thank you for preparing this interesting article. Here's some preliminary thoughts from my first look.

Thank you very much for taking this on!Brigade Piron (talk) 19:03, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

References: Checklinks and Reflinks found no problems. Please specify the language for foreign-language sources. The Further Reading section needs to be sorted alphabetically by author. Sources appear to be high quality books and journal articles.

Have you ever thought about using the short-form notation Harvard references? A lot of the sources are used repeatedly, so this article is well suited to that format, which has sources listed in a bibliography and the {{sfn}} template used in the prose. Not a GA requirement obviously, but it's a really nice way to do the citations. Please let me know if you want to try this out and I will help you get started, or even convert the article for you.

I'd not be averse to trying the SFN citation style (I've just used it in the Congo Crisis GA) but the idea of converting all the article would involve a frankly terrifying amount of time! For this reason, I'd hesitate to ask you to do it for me. Can a bot or something be brought in for this? Brigade Piron (talk) 19:03, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

Thank you very much for managing the change!—Brigade Piron (talk) 15:35, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

It took about two hours. -- Diannaa (talk) 22:47, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

Manual of Style: The Manual of Style calls for percentages to be spelled out as prose rather than using the symbol % for non-technical articles. It says "common", though, so it's not mandatory for GA; you decide. The link to Thomas Pakenham points to a disambiguation page; I don't think your guy is there; the link needs to be removed (4 instances). There's some over-linking, especially in the authorlinks. Please remove what you can find and I will check thoroughly later using AWB.Y

Some terms are in quotation marks that I think are unnecessary. Please have a look at removing the quotation marks from the following terms:Y

• French period
• Schools' War
• chambers
• Committee of United Belgians and Liégois
• Belgian Legion (2 instances)
• Société Générale des Pays-Bas
• mob rule
• King of the Belgians
• Unionist
• Antwerp Programme
• Schlieffen Plan

All very reasonable. I hope it's all sorted, but please let me know if I've missed any aspect. Forgive me if I'm wrong, but I believe multiple (over) linking in the intro, captions and notes is permissible - is the same not true for inline citations? Brigade Piron (talk) 19:03, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

Multiple links are of course allowed (once in the lead and once in the body, or once in the body and once in a caption, for example). For citations, I would link only on first occurrence. That problem has disappeared now that the article has been converted to Harvard citations. If there's multiple books by the same author, I link only on first occurrence (or if the author is mentioned in the prose, once in the prose and once in the citations). -- Diannaa (talk) 01:36, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

Prose: The article is long and complex so I will go through the prose in stages. I hope you don't mind if I do some copy edits. Please feel free to revert anything you think I did wrong. I will post here any questions that I need your input on. -- Diannaa (talk) 17:04, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

Geography and demographics: I have done some copy edits. Please provide a citation for the sentence Other notable exiles who lived in Belgium during the period include the painter Jacques-Louis David, the writer Victor Hugo and the theorist Karl Marx. -- Diannaa (talk) 01:36, 5 August 2014 (UTC)Y

Done, and slight rephrase to make it a bit less clunky.—Brigade Piron (talk) 15:34, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

I have re-added the info that the ceded territories had 300,000 inhabitants. I took me a while to figure out how to word it. -- Diannaa (talk) 22:47, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

Thanks! —Brigade Piron (talk) 12:01, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

Austrian rule and the Prince-Bishopric of Liège

• I think it's important to have it more transparent as to where the links are leading. In some cases it means the prose will not read exactly as one might like. This is not a GA requirement though, so please feel free to revert if you don't agree with these changes.

• These two sentences need a citation: Although Enlightenment ideals developed among the urban bourgeoisie, most of the population remained suspicious of education and extremely politically conservative. The Catholic church was particularly influential, despite the attempts of Emperor Joseph II to reduce its power.Y

• The Prince-Bishopric of Liège was a small ecclesiastical state ruled by a Prince-bishop which could trace its lineage back as far as the 10th century. The lineage refers to the prince-bishop, so to make this clearer, might I suggest The Prince-Bishopric of Liège was a small ecclesiastical state ruled by a line of prince-bishops that had been in existence since the 10th century.

Actually in this case it refers to the polity itself. Do you think this needs to be clarified? —Brigade Piron (talk) 10:20, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

How about "The Prince-Bishopric of Liège was a small ecclesiastical state that had been in existence since the 10th century. It was ruled by a line of prince-bishops." ?

Done. —Brigade Piron (talk) 12:01, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

• Prince-bishopric and prince-bishop should not be capitalised unless we are talking about a specific case. MOS:JOBTITLESY

I think this has been resolved now. —Brigade Piron (talk) 10:20, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

• The spread of the Enlightenment, which became popular in Liège in the 18th century, bred further discontent with the political system. This sentence needs a citation.Y

Revolutions of 1789

• The revolution was conservative in character. In what way? Less violent than the French revolution, perhaps?Y

In this case, politically conservative (i.e. not seeking to create a radically different social or religious order like the French revolutionaries wanted to).—Brigade Piron (talk) 10:20, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

I have added a bit. -- Diannaa (talk) 15:42, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

• Despite the revolutionaries pleading their case, the Diet of the Holy Roman Empire condemned the revolution and ordered the restoration of the old regime. The army of Liège was finally defeated by the Austrians, who re-occupied the city in January 1791. The Prince-Bishop was reinstated. These sentences need a citation. -- Diannaa (talk) 00:00, 6 August 2014 (UTC)Y

Done. —Brigade Piron (talk) 12:01, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

French rule, Dutch rule: Please check the copy edit work. Note you should not use "spring", "summer", etc, since these words mean different things in different parts of the world. Therefore Spring 1815→early 1815. I am tired so I am stopping there for the day. -- Diannaa (talk) 01:22, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

Reign of Leopold I: The Ten Days' Campaign had revealed the fragility of the Belgian position, and although the Dutch finally recognized the independence of Belgium, the Belgians were forced to give up some disputed territories, including Zeelandic Flanders and the Duchy of Limburg. Part of Luxembourg remained as a protectorate of the Dutch. This needs a citation please.Y

Leopold II: The Zouaves, as they were known, were ultimately unsuccessful and the Papal States fell in 1870. A volunteer Belgian Legion fought alongside French forces in the Mexican Adventure from 1864 on behalf of Mexican Emperor Maximilian I, whose wife was the daughter of Leopold I. The unit suffered heavy casualties at the Battle of Tacámbaro in 1865, and after heavy fighting was disbanded in December 1866. This material needs citations please.Y

Done! —Brigade Piron (talk) 12:01, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

Franco-Prussian War:

• As the conflict begun, it was feared that either France or Prussia might try to outflank their opponent by invading and annexing neutral Belgium. Feared by whom?

By contemporaries, especially Belgian ones. I have changed "feared" to "believed" in line with NPOV though. —Brigade Piron (talk) 10:31, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

How about this: "As the conflict began, Leopold and his advisors believed that either France or Prussia might try to outflank their opponent by invading and annexing neutral Belgium." ?

Sorted.—Brigade Piron (talk) 12:01, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

• More crucially, the mobilization of the Belgian army, which was divided into a mobile Army of Observation to guard the frontier and the static Army of Antwerp to hold the National Redoubt, revealed key structural problems in the military, particularly with the system of conscription. Events also re-emphasized the importance of the Treaty of London to Belgium's survival. This material needs citations.

Done! —Brigade Piron (talk) 12:01, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose: clear and concise, correct spelling and grammar:

   • I have completed two rounds of copy editing and am satisfied that the prose meets the GA requirements.

   B. Complies with MoS for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:

   • The Lead should draw on material from all parts of the article. You need to add a short summary of the material in the Themes section please.Y

This should be addressed now.—Brigade Piron (talk) 11:22, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

1. Sourcing:

   A. Provides references, with in-line citations from reliable sources where necessary:

   • Please add citations to the passages specified above.Y

   B. Contains no copyright violations or too-close paraphrasing:

   • Spot checks revealed no copyright violations or too-close paraphrasing.

   C. No original research:

   • Passages marked above need citations to verify that these analyses are are the opinions of historians and not the editor.Y

2. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Main aspects are addressed:

   B. Remains focused:

3. Does it follow the neutral point of view policy?

   Fair representation without bias:

4. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

5. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

   A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

   • File:Leopold II of Belgium.jpg has no source information. Please find an alternate image. Other images in the article check out fine.

That's rather a shame but I can't seem to find it. If I do, I'll re-enstate it. Am I right in thinking that it is almost certainly out of copyright though (he died before 1910 after all)? In the meantime, I've replaced it with a free coin. —Brigade Piron (talk) 11:24, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

The image is likely in the public domain in the United States, as it was likely published (not created) before 1923. However in order to be hosted on the Commons the image must also be in the public domain in the country where it was created (Belgium). Their copyright law calls for the image to be protected until 70 years after the death of the creator of the image. It's therefore theoretically possible that the image is still under copyright in its home country, if the photographer was young at the time he took the shot. Without knowing who took the photo, we can't determine its copyright status, and the lack of source details makes it impossible to find out.

1. B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:

2. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

The article is on hold for seven days to complete the remaining items. -- Diannaa (talk) 23:56, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

I am now passing the article to GA status. Congratulations and best wishes. -- Diannaa (talk) 00:03, 10 August 2014 (UTC)