Wikipedia

Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Karl Aloys zu Fürstenberg

< Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history | Assessment
The following discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Karl Aloys zu Fürstenberg

edit
Nominator(s): Auntieruth55 (talk)
Toolbox

I am nominating this article for A-Class review because...it fills a gap in wikicoverage on the Field Marshals of the Hereditary States of the House of Austria, particularly during the French Revolutionary Wars and the Napoleonic Wars. This is one of several articles I've worked on (others include Friedrich Freiherr von Hotze, Johann von Klenau, Maximilian, Count of Merveldt, Johann Heinrich von Schmidt, Friedrich Joseph, Count of Nauendorf, u.s.w. The article has passed GA (under scrutiny of an experienced project member), is well-sourced, cited in my usual style (without cite templates, full citation first time, abbreviated after that), and has a few illustrations. As of now, there are no dabs, alt= text is present on required images, and the links all work. I am the primary editor. I look forward to your helpful critiques! Auntieruth55 (talk) 18:59, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comments
    • No problems reported with alt text, dab links, or external links. Well done.
    • The last line fo the second paragraph of the childhood and early career section has the line "On 1 January 1790, at Loudon's explicit request, he was promoted to major general and at the end of June of that year, given the position of second colonel of the 34th Infantry-Regiment Anton Esterhazy." I'm a little puzzled over how one can be promoted to Major General and yet receive a position of Second Colonel, perhaps you could shed some light on this mystery?
good job! Of all the people who've read this, you are the first one who has either noticed this apparent contradiction, or considered saying something. I've explained it (I hope). It is correct, although it does look odd. This was a plum assignment for him, and probably quite profitable too.
Thanks for the clarification. TomStar81 (Talk) 03:52, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I used colons to indent and an asterisk for the little dot. Was that wrong? I've removed the colons, but for future reference, let me know. Auntieruth55 (talk) 03:07, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
At this level, probably not; however they are likely to call you for it at an FAC. TomStar81 (Talk) 03:52, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • question What is the following sentence trying to tell me: "As the third son of a cadet branch of the Fürstenberg family (Bohemian line), the prince was marked for a military career."? In particular I don't know what a cadet branch is nor do I know what a Bohemian line is. Is this standard knowledge in the English speaking world? MisterBee1966 (talk) 23:13, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
well, it's supposed to mean (1) cadet Branch = is a junior branch of a family line. For example, the House of Bourbon's cadet branch would be the house of Bourbon-Conde. It is similar to the relationship between the Bavarian Wittelsbachs and the Palatine Wittelsbachs (See War of the Bavarian Succession). (2) the Bohemian line: the main line that inherited the specific title was in Donaueeschingen, and the Bohemian line (the cadet line), was in, well, Bohemia, not in Germany. How would you say all this in German? Actually, when the prince died (not Karl Aloys, but his cousin Karl Joachim, Fürst zu Fürstenberg), Karl Aloys' son inherited the title. So although Karl Aloys zu Fürstenberg was not Karl Aloys, Fürst zu Fürstenberg, his son became the Fürst zu Fürstenberg: Karl Egon II, Fürst zu Fürstenberg. Auntieruth55 (talk) 23:24, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
some more added at family section (end) Auntieruth55 (talk) 16:47, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'll be happy to support if a few minor points can be addressed:
    • From the lead: "inheriting the family dignities". I think I understand what this is saying, but might "titles" or "honours" be more appropriate?
fixed. Auntieruth55 (talk) 16:47, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • Relating to MisterBee's comment above, is there more detail that can go into the Childhood and early military training section? For example, presumably he was "marked for a military career" from an early age; I think explicitly saying this might be hlpful even if we can't put dates and numbers to it. Similarly, mentioning his age at various milestones would be more informative that just giving the dates (start of service, promotion to captain etc).
I added a few details, but there isn't much. He moved quickly through the food chain. I added more on his siblings, etc., to the family section at the end, explaining why the title went to his son. Auntieruth55 (talk) 16:47, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough - we can only stick to the scope of the sources available. Your additions are helpful. EyeSerenetalk 08:24, 3 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • "This was a customary appointment in which a rising-star..." How about something less idiomatic than "rising star" (which incidantally shouldn't be hyphenated)? 'potential senior commanders' perhaps?
I changed this.Auntieruth55 (talk) 16:47, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • There are some tense contradictions; for exmaple "In these early days of the French revolutionary wars..." might be better as "In the early days of the French revolutionary wars..."
    • The article uses British and English interchangably in places. Is this correct?
It does? I didn't see it. Auntieruth55 (talk) 16:47, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Well, once :) I've altered it. EyeSerenetalk 08:24, 3 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • There are some long, comma-intensive sentences that might benefit from being split.
went through and did that.Auntieruth55 (talk) 16:47, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'd recommend a full independent copyedit if you're heading FA-wards, but otherwise it's an excellent, well-researched, fascinating article. Well done! EyeSerenetalk 10:54, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

thanks. I'll ask someone else (possibly JN) to do a ce if I plan to take it further. Right now it's not in my "imagined" queue for FA consideration, but one never knows. Auntieruth55 (talk) 16:47, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your helpful comments!  :) Auntieruth55 (talk) 22:18, 3 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Support

  • What's a confraternal award?
  • He went from major to major general in 1790? That's a pretty big jump. But why would a major general be used as a second colonel?
  • Please add a mention of his marriage before you spring the birth of his daughter on the reader.

Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 19:28, 5 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Military_history/Assessment/Karl_Aloys_zu_Fürstenberg&oldid=1088198171"