Regarding my reviewing style, issues I identify below will be prepended by the number of the relevant
GA criterion. As they are resolved, I will cross out the issue number.
1a: The article body says there are different figures for his date of birth. But the lead and infobox give it unambiguously as 29 August 1755, and the persondata specifically says it was 2 August 1755. Perhaps these should simply say August 1755? Also, the text says he died on 6 June 1818, but the lead, the infobox, and the persondata, say he died 6 July 1818.
This is odd.
Template:Infobox military person says to use {{birth date}} for the birth date (if known), but
Template:Birth date says "Do not use this template when the person’s exact date of birth is disputed or unknown." When the birth date is not known exactly, it advises we use {{Birth year and age}}... but that's not right, since it assumes the person is still alive. I don't know what to do when the date is not known exactly. You could either omit the birth date, or type out "2 or 29 August 1755". –
Quadell(
talk)15:31, 5 December 2013 (UTC)reply
1a: There are some grammatical errors in the sentences beginning "He fought in the War...", "The Grodno Sejm, held...", "This proved to be more successful...", and "Their defeat was completed..."
I've added a short section on remembrance; I'd certainly expanded it for A/FA (particularly since all I can see online are snippets), but I think the word hero is justified - it seems to be used by many reliable sources, and I am not seeing any significant criticism that would allow us to say that any due weight publication is denying him this common monicker. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus|
reply here07:24, 6 December 2013 (UTC)reply
1b: A "Further reading" section should not reproduce links already in the article body, per
WP:FURTHER. Two of the links are already included in the article, and the third (
Greater Poland Uprising (1794)) really should be. I don't think this see also section is needed at all.
1b: Per
MOS:PARAGRAPHS, "The number of single-sentence paragraphs should be minimized, since they can inhibit the flow of the text". This article contains three single-sentence paragraphs. (Oddly, some material has been commented out of the body text. Is this intentional?)
3a: This article does not link to
VIII Corps (Grande Armée), which has additional information that could be useful in this article, especially the "1812–1813" section. In addition, there is a lot of relevant information in the
Polish Legions (Napoleonic period) article which is missing from here. There is also a little information in
Greater Poland Uprising (1794) that could be included here.
Here are the examples I've found of sourced content in the
Polish Legions (Napoleonic period) article, which I think deserve mention here. Let me know if you disagree; otherwise, go ahead and include them.
The Polish Legions were also known as the "Dąbrowski Legions".
"The Polish soldiers serving in the Dąbrowski Legion were granted Lombardian citizenship and were paid the same wage as other troops. They were allowed to use their own unique Polish-style uniforms, with some French and Lombardian symbols, and were commanded by other Polish speakers."
"In May 1798 the Poles helped the French to secure the Papal States, putting down some peasant revolts, and garrisoned Rome, which they entered on 3 May. Dąbrowski obtained a number of trophies from a Roman representative, that the Polish king, Jan III Sobieski, had sent there after his victory over the Ottoman Empire at the siege of Vienna in 1683; amongst these was an Ottoman standard which subsequently became part of the Legions' colors, accompanying them from then on."
After the legionnaires' disappointment, but before the Haitian revolution, "Dąbrowski remained in command, and reorganized both Legions at Milan into two 6,000-strong units in March 1801."
Sentence added. To be honest, I feel the years 1801-1803 need to be expanded in the article, but sources are scarce (PSB doesn't discuss them, others are available to me only as snippets). Reading the snippets it seems N. relieved D. of Legions command, and then decided to throw them away, but I don't have good sources to discuss this in the article for now. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus|
reply here08:15, 7 December 2013 (UTC)reply
More info about recapturing Greater Poland from Prussia: "French armies, including the Legion units, defeated the Prussians in Saxony at the battle of Jena and Poles under Dąbrowski entered former Polish territories (near the city of Poznań)"
And here are the examples I've found of sourced content in the
Greater Poland Uprising (1794) article, which I think deserve mention here.
In that uprising, Dąbrowski's forces captured Bydgoszcz and entered Pomerania almost unopposed. He evacuated Wielkopolska and make his way into central Poland.
The Prussians recaptured most of the gains made by the insurrectionists in the previous few months.
Dąbrowski unsuccessfully tried to convince Tomasz Wawrzecki to move the insurrection from central Poland to the Prussian partition.
Those are wonderful additions. I agree that it's risky to add information when you can't see the sources. I figured you would know better than I would which of these are most relevant. I have copy-edited your additions, and I have no further completeness concerns. –
Quadell(
talk)16:40, 7 December 2013 (UTC)reply
3a: The article should have a "legacy" section that gives info about the Arc de Triomphe, the Polish national anthem, and any other information about his legacy and later reputation.
I think that, for the purposes of the GA criteria, this article "addresses the main aspects of the topic" (in regards to legacy), even if it doesn't fully cover that particular aspect. –
Quadell(
talk)15:53, 6 December 2013 (UTC)reply
6b: The caption for the Coat of Arms image does not describe which coat of arms is shown or why it's relevant.
Regarding my reviewing style, issues I identify below will be prepended by the number of the relevant
GA criterion. As they are resolved, I will cross out the issue number.
1a: The article body says there are different figures for his date of birth. But the lead and infobox give it unambiguously as 29 August 1755, and the persondata specifically says it was 2 August 1755. Perhaps these should simply say August 1755? Also, the text says he died on 6 June 1818, but the lead, the infobox, and the persondata, say he died 6 July 1818.
This is odd.
Template:Infobox military person says to use {{birth date}} for the birth date (if known), but
Template:Birth date says "Do not use this template when the person’s exact date of birth is disputed or unknown." When the birth date is not known exactly, it advises we use {{Birth year and age}}... but that's not right, since it assumes the person is still alive. I don't know what to do when the date is not known exactly. You could either omit the birth date, or type out "2 or 29 August 1755". –
Quadell(
talk)15:31, 5 December 2013 (UTC)reply
1a: There are some grammatical errors in the sentences beginning "He fought in the War...", "The Grodno Sejm, held...", "This proved to be more successful...", and "Their defeat was completed..."
I've added a short section on remembrance; I'd certainly expanded it for A/FA (particularly since all I can see online are snippets), but I think the word hero is justified - it seems to be used by many reliable sources, and I am not seeing any significant criticism that would allow us to say that any due weight publication is denying him this common monicker. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus|
reply here07:24, 6 December 2013 (UTC)reply
1b: A "Further reading" section should not reproduce links already in the article body, per
WP:FURTHER. Two of the links are already included in the article, and the third (
Greater Poland Uprising (1794)) really should be. I don't think this see also section is needed at all.
1b: Per
MOS:PARAGRAPHS, "The number of single-sentence paragraphs should be minimized, since they can inhibit the flow of the text". This article contains three single-sentence paragraphs. (Oddly, some material has been commented out of the body text. Is this intentional?)
3a: This article does not link to
VIII Corps (Grande Armée), which has additional information that could be useful in this article, especially the "1812–1813" section. In addition, there is a lot of relevant information in the
Polish Legions (Napoleonic period) article which is missing from here. There is also a little information in
Greater Poland Uprising (1794) that could be included here.
Here are the examples I've found of sourced content in the
Polish Legions (Napoleonic period) article, which I think deserve mention here. Let me know if you disagree; otherwise, go ahead and include them.
The Polish Legions were also known as the "Dąbrowski Legions".
"The Polish soldiers serving in the Dąbrowski Legion were granted Lombardian citizenship and were paid the same wage as other troops. They were allowed to use their own unique Polish-style uniforms, with some French and Lombardian symbols, and were commanded by other Polish speakers."
"In May 1798 the Poles helped the French to secure the Papal States, putting down some peasant revolts, and garrisoned Rome, which they entered on 3 May. Dąbrowski obtained a number of trophies from a Roman representative, that the Polish king, Jan III Sobieski, had sent there after his victory over the Ottoman Empire at the siege of Vienna in 1683; amongst these was an Ottoman standard which subsequently became part of the Legions' colors, accompanying them from then on."
After the legionnaires' disappointment, but before the Haitian revolution, "Dąbrowski remained in command, and reorganized both Legions at Milan into two 6,000-strong units in March 1801."
Sentence added. To be honest, I feel the years 1801-1803 need to be expanded in the article, but sources are scarce (PSB doesn't discuss them, others are available to me only as snippets). Reading the snippets it seems N. relieved D. of Legions command, and then decided to throw them away, but I don't have good sources to discuss this in the article for now. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus|
reply here08:15, 7 December 2013 (UTC)reply
More info about recapturing Greater Poland from Prussia: "French armies, including the Legion units, defeated the Prussians in Saxony at the battle of Jena and Poles under Dąbrowski entered former Polish territories (near the city of Poznań)"
And here are the examples I've found of sourced content in the
Greater Poland Uprising (1794) article, which I think deserve mention here.
In that uprising, Dąbrowski's forces captured Bydgoszcz and entered Pomerania almost unopposed. He evacuated Wielkopolska and make his way into central Poland.
The Prussians recaptured most of the gains made by the insurrectionists in the previous few months.
Dąbrowski unsuccessfully tried to convince Tomasz Wawrzecki to move the insurrection from central Poland to the Prussian partition.
Those are wonderful additions. I agree that it's risky to add information when you can't see the sources. I figured you would know better than I would which of these are most relevant. I have copy-edited your additions, and I have no further completeness concerns. –
Quadell(
talk)16:40, 7 December 2013 (UTC)reply
3a: The article should have a "legacy" section that gives info about the Arc de Triomphe, the Polish national anthem, and any other information about his legacy and later reputation.
I think that, for the purposes of the GA criteria, this article "addresses the main aspects of the topic" (in regards to legacy), even if it doesn't fully cover that particular aspect. –
Quadell(
talk)15:53, 6 December 2013 (UTC)reply
6b: The caption for the Coat of Arms image does not describe which coat of arms is shown or why it's relevant.