A fact from Hetmans' Party appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 26 August 2011 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Poland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Poland on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PolandWikipedia:WikiProject PolandTemplate:WikiProject PolandPoland articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Russia, a WikiProject dedicated to coverage of Russia on Wikipedia. To participate: Feel free to edit the article attached to this page, join up at the project page, or contribute to the project discussion.RussiaWikipedia:WikiProject RussiaTemplate:WikiProject RussiaRussia articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Conservatism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of conservatism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ConservatismWikipedia:WikiProject ConservatismTemplate:WikiProject ConservatismConservatism articles
The hatnote seems unnecessary unless there's another article to link to (i.e., a blue link).
The phrase Golden Freedoms or Golden Liberties is used (and Wikilinked) in each of the four sections, but what they were is never said.
A little more context about Russia and its influence on Poland might be helpful to the reader. In the Background section, the Patriotic Party was formed to assure independence from Russia, but the nature of the threat isn't explained clearly.
In the context of this article, perhaps the name "War in Defense of the Constitution" isn't the best name?
Unless it is really against MoS, I'd keep the hatnote per WP:RED. The Hetman Party (1764-1764) was also notable, and an article should be created on it.
The first para mentions they were the "their [magnates] privileged status". Isn't this enough? Perhaps you could add a little, what may be needed is perhaps not apparent for me, since I am so familiar with the subject.
According to WP:Hatnote#Non-existent articles, there shouldn't be a hatnote for an article that doesn't exist. But that's "just a guideline", and WP:IAR, so I'm not going to make a fuss about it.
