Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Teresa Sampsonia/archive1

< Wikipedia:Featured article candidates
The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by Laser brain via FACBot (talk) 15:32, 3 January 2019 [1].

Teresa Sampsonia edit

Nominator(s): LouisAragon (talk) 17:34, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about a remarkable woman of the 17th century. Though often overshadowed by the "legacy" of her husband (Robert Shirley), Teresa had an unique life story. Born into a noble family in Safavid Iran, alongside her husband Robert, she travelled far and wide, and became the subject of numerous contemporary literary and visual works during her own lifetime. The article has already had a pretty extensive review by Ceranthor. - LouisAragon (talk) 17:34, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Final comments from Ceranthor
  • "After her husband died of dysentery, and due to impediments from grandees at the court and the authorities during the reign of Abbas' successor and grandson Safi (r. 1629–1642), she decided to leave Iran." - I'd replace the "she" here with Teresa
  • "she mentions their travels, and refers to her noble Circassian origins." - I'd cut the comma after "travels"
  • Is it possible to add the son to the infobox?
  • "The favourite of Emamqoli Khan, who still wanted to marry Teresa, sent his servants to the Carmelites in Isfahan to capture her. " - to whom does "the favorite" refer?
  • "After three years in Safavid Iran since returning from her last trip with her husband" - seems a little wordy; maybe rephrase?

Otherwise, I think the prose is engaging enough. References seem reliable. Little concerned that the last picture of the headstone isn't actually public domain, but I'll leave that to an image review expert to confirm. Otherwise, support. ceranthor 17:59, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You are right, the photo is taken from an angle, so that the three-dimensionality of the surroundings can be seen, and therefore PD for 2D objects doesn't apply. FunkMonk (talk) 22:38, 28 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Mike Christie edit

I was the GA reviewer, and have been watching Ceranthor and LouisAragon's very thorough preparations for FAC. This is in excellent shape and I expect to support. A couple of minor points:

  • Suggest giving the year of her husband's death at the start of the second paragraph of the lead. Perhaps "Her husband died of dysentery in 1628, and due to...".
  • The link to Circassian in the lead goes to a dab page.
  • According to Herbert, Robert Shirley "was the greatest Traveller of his time"; however, he admired the "undaunted Lady Teresa" even more: suggest "According to Herbert, Robert Shirley "was the greatest Traveller of his time", but he admired the "undaunted Lady Teresa" even more.
  • Suggest moving the "(Greek or Georgian Orthodoxy)" parenthesis to a note.
  • She was named Sampsonia by birth. Do you mean "at birth", or something else?
  • Suggest moving note [d] to directly after footnote 11, where it immediately follows the mention of her aunt.
  • Ali Qoli Beg (the King's ambassador: I assume this is Abbas's ambassador, but since we've mentioned other kings since the last mention of Abbas I would be explicit here.
  • There, Teresa came to know the Carmelite nuns, particularly Mother Beatrix de Jesus (the niece of Saint Teresa, from whom she received a relic of Teresa: unclosed parenthesis: I'd have closed it but I'm not sure if you intended it to go after "Saint Teresa" or at the end of the sentence. An em dash instead of the opening paren might work just as well.
  • In the paragraph starting "During Shirley's diplomatic missions", it's apparent there were several portraits. You say "retained a symbolic item", but it appears it varied from portrait to portrait since you say "a pistol in one portrait". How about "but for each portrait she retained a symbolic item", or (perhaps simpler): "but retained symbolic items" and assume the remainder of the sentence lets the reader know these varied?
  • However, a favourite of his wanted to marry Teresa: suggest "a favourite of Allahverdi Khan's" since it's not easy to parse this. Perhaps "a favourite of Enamqoli Khan's, who wanted to marry Teresa, reminded the Khan...". I also think you could lose the "However".
  • the happening would take place: "the happening" is ugly. I see that "the questioning" would be repetitious, but could we just say "that she and the mullah would meet"?
  • Since he favoured the Carmelite Fathers: perhaps "Since the Khan favoured"?
  • Why is it relevant that the prefect is a Georgian?
  • Because, like Emamqoli Khan ("the governor"), he was of Georgian origin as well. At least, I thought it would be interesting to add, but we can leave it out as well of course. Please let me know what you think, and I'll adjust the sentence. - LouisAragon (talk) 21:09, 28 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    OK, but as someone who knows little about the period or the culture, I don't know what that implies. Perhaps the fact that they are both Georgian means they automatically collaborated in political or religious matters? Or that they shared certain views? In an article about US politics, I would know what "..., also a Republican, ..." implies, but I think you'll have to supply the implication here, perhaps in a footnote. A minor point, in any case; I've supported below and I trust you to do what you think best with this. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 21:55, 28 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • This text shows that Teresa subverted...: suggest attributing this inline, which would also allow you to avoid the awkward "This text shows". Perhaps "According to Andrea (2017), the text demonstrates that..."

-- Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 22:39, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Support. A fine article. I've left one reply above, but it doesn't affect my support. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 21:55, 28 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

  • Use upright scaling rather than fixed image sizes
  • @Nikkimaria: You mean by substituting "...px" with "upright"?
You can see soemthing similar at the first image on the left in Mascarene grey parakeet. You can control the size by writing different numbers. FunkMonk (talk) 16:00, 17 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@FunkMonk: Done. Thanks man. Please change the digits if you don't think it looks neat. - LouisAragon (talk) 01:32, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • File:Shirleys.JPG: source link is dead
  • File:Teresia,_Countess_of_Shirley,_painted_c._1611-1613.jpg: some of the details in the caption are not sourced
  • As far as I can see (but please, do correct me), the only thing thats not explicitly stated in the source is "(...) and dressed in then contemporary attire". I decided to add that to the caption, because the source does state that "The Shirleys travelled a great deal, but were in England from 1611 to 1612/13 - a date which fits with the costume of this portrait." Your thoughts? - LouisAragon (talk) 21:40, 28 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • The image description page isn't a source per se - these details should have an inline citation in the article. However, on clicking through to the source from the image description page, I note that the caption is almost identical to what's given there, without any indication of quoting. That's a plagiarism concern. Nikkimaria (talk) 21:48, 28 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hmm thats really odd. Thanks. I just corrected it, I believe. - LouisAragon (talk) 22:04, 28 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Er, this doesn't seem to have been changed at all. Nikkimaria (talk) 16:42, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • On 28 October 2018, I added the name of the author (art historian Patricia Smyth), signifying that its clearly stated by her.[2] However, I now realize I had forgotten about quotation marks, so I just added those as well (as its basically entirely Smyth's statement, word for word verbatim). - LouisAragon (talk) 17:15, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • File:Teresia,_Lady_Shirley_(etching,_possibly_late_18th_century).jpg needs a US PD tag
  • File:Trastevere_-_santa_maria_della_scala_01586-9.JPG: as Italy does not have freedom of panorama, this will need an explicit tag for the original work. Nikkimaria (talk) 20:50, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
What is meant here is that you need to add a PD old tag for the building itself. Similar to here:[3] FunkMonk (talk) 15:57, 17 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Done, I think. - LouisAragon (talk) 01:03, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Source review

I think that R. Bip is an odd publisher name and if it's a shortened form it should probably be expanded; otherwise the formatting of the sources seems OK to me. I take that "Shah Abbas: The Ruthless King Who Became an Iranian Legend.", "Van Dyck, 1599-1641", "Titles and Emoluments in Safavid Iran: A Third Manual of Safavid Administration, by Mirza Naqi Nasiri." are reliable sources? Nothing else jumps out as problematic. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 11:46, 28 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • "Shah Abbas: The Ruthless King Who Became an Iranian Legend." -- David Blow is a historian who specializes in Iranian studies[4] I.B. Tauris is a high-quality publisher.
  • "Titles and Emoluments in Safavid Iran: A Third Manual of Safavid Administration" -- by Willem Floor, a renowned authority in Iranian studies, specifically the Safavid/early modern era.
  • "Van Dyck, 1599-1641" -- by Karen Hearn. She's well-known art historian specializing in the era of van Dyck. - LouisAragon (talk) 09:55, 3 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Some additional source formatting notes, assisted by this handy script:

  • You're inconsistent about using locations in your book sources: three have locations, but the rest do not. It doesn't matter which you choose but they should be consistent.
  • Globe should come before Hannay in the list.
  • Can you supply a page range for Andrea (2015) and Andrea (2017b)?
    Could you elaborate? :-) What do you exactly mean with page range, and where do you want me to write it down? - LouisAragon (talk) 10:01, 3 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Those are chapters or essays in an edited work, aren't they? I meant the start and end page of that work within the volume. I see you have what is presumably the start page for Andrea (2017a); it's helpful to give the whole page range. If you prefer not to, I think for FAC it would be OK if omitted, but if so I'd drop the page number that you do have, for consistency. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 21:12, 4 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Done. - LouisAragon (talk) 16:06, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    That looks right for 2017b, but there's something wrong with 2017a -- the page number in the list of sources is just "124", rather than a range, and that doesn't appear to be the start of the article because pages 33 and 34 are cited in footnotes 34 and 35. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 16:23, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    2017a is entirely written by Andrea, whereas 2017b and 2015 are compendiums in which Andrea has just written chapters. The 2017a issue should be fixed now. - LouisAragon (talk) 16:37, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'll do a spotcheck of sources for close paraphrasing shortly. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 22:00, 28 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Spotcheck I don't have access to the main sources. Checking Schwartz 2013:

  • The cite for the translation of the headstone is fine.
  • Source: "In the small circles in which they moved, Robert and Teresia became sights to see for their rich, exotic dress". Article: "In the small circles in which they went, they were sights to see for their rich, exotic attire". This is much too close; please rephrase.
  • The cite for "made of silk and velvet" slightly misquotes the source, which says "silk and silk velvet": if you leave the quotes in place it needs to match the source. Otherwise this citation is fine with no close paraphrasing.
  • The cite for "wide variety..." is fine, but I noticed a story about her being poisoned in Madrid on that page. Any reason why you left that out of the article? It's not treated as definitely true by Schwartz, but he doesn't dismiss it.
  • Because its only Schwartz who mentions this, apparantly. I didn't want to put WP:UNDUE weight on a possibility. Please let me know if you think that I should include it nevertheless. - LouisAragon (talk) 10:04, 3 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Your call; it seems interesting to me, and I think most readers would agree. You could give whatever caveats are necessary in the text or a footnote. But no, it's not necessary; I trust your judgement. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 16:25, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Checking Tuson 2013:

  • "Buried in the convent..." OK
  • "partly self-created..." OK, appropriately quoted.

Since I found one issue, I'd like to ask for the source for one more randomly selected citation. Could you post here or email me the source for "In the Safavid Empire women were prohibited from traveling abroad without permission", which you give as p. 292 of Chick & Matthee? Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 22:25, 28 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • @Mike Christie: Sure thing.[5] Not sure whether you can view the page though, as Google.books acts strange sometimes. - LouisAragon (talk) 16:54, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    I can't see it; I get "not part of the example or reached your viewing limit". Nikki, since you apparently have access to a copy, could you check this one? Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 18:43, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • The search in that link doesn't return page 292, but here's the corresponding text: "there is in Persia a law forbidding any woman to leave the country without first obtaining a special permit to that effect". Nikkimaria (talk) 19:27, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks, Nikki. The spotchecks seem good enough to me; Nikki, up to you if you want to look at a couple more, since you have access to that source, at least. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 19:36, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
LouisAragon, just pinging to make sure you saw this request. I've replied to a couple of points above; the only one that needs action is the page range issue; the other points are optional. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 16:26, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm looking at the Chick & Matthee source and have additional concerns about close paraphrasing. Compare for example "the King advised her not to be afraid, because it would be harder for him to put one woman to death than a hundred men" with "he told her not to be afraid, because it would be harder for him to put a woman to death than 100 men". Nikkimaria (talk) 16:58, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

From FunkMonk edit

  • This looks very interesting, will have a look soon. FunkMonk (talk) 22:33, 28 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • First, I see a good deal of duplinks, try this script to highlight them:[6]
  • The last paragraph under "Departure from Safavid kingdom and later life" is a bit of a text wall compared to the rest of the article, perhaps break it up somewhere?
  • Good point, I agree. Do you have any suggestion? - LouisAragon (talk) 10:17, 3 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps split before "She had the headstone inscribed". FunkMonk (talk) 18:14, 3 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Done. - LouisAragon (talk) 16:11, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • "probably the first child born in England of Iranian descent" Who is this quoted to? Direct quotes should always be attributed in text, or just rephrased.
  • Done. - LouisAragon (talk) 17:28, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Mentioned within note "g", right behind the sentence. If you think it should really be mentioned outside within text and not inside the note, please let me know. - LouisAragon (talk) 10:17, 3 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Then I don't see why a direct quote is needed in the article body, though, if it isn't disputed. FunkMonk (talk) 18:14, 3 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I have no idea how to rephrase it, in order to get rid of the direct quote. Any suggestions? - LouisAragon (talk) 01:28, 19 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • "reportedly saved her husband's life on two occasions" Any details on this?
Hmm, if this is part of the historical "myth", it needs to be mentioned for comprehensiveness, all you need to do is specify if the claims are dubious. Would warrant at least a footnote. FunkMonk (talk) 18:14, 3 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Will add a footnote about it. - LouisAragon (talk) 01:20, 19 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Done. Made some large scale adjustments. Let me know what you think. - LouisAragon (talk) 05:02, 20 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • "(the former capital)" I think you could specify Iran, as this is in a new paragrapgh.
  • "They disgraced her to the King, and it was published in the court that the King intended to execute her by burning." If apostasy was illegal at the time, this should be stated.
  • "he didn't" Contractions are discouraged.
  • "The prefect, also a Georgian" Like who? You stated Tersa was Circassian?
  • Yeah I meant to say that the prefect was a Georgian just like the governor of Shiraz. I rephrased it in order to prevent confusion. - LouisAragon (talk) 10:17, 3 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • The frame in this[7] image is three dimentional, so is not PD; it could be cropped out.
  • Just made a section at graphics lab/illustration workshop.[8] Will be solved momentarily. - LouisAragon (talk) 17:23, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think the main text could mention their son died young.
  • The intro seems to be out of chronological order, might be better to follow the structure of the article body. You jump form her early life to after Shirley's death, and then back to her travels with Shirley again.
  • Valid point I think. Do you have a suggestion? I don't wanna mess up the grammar and overal coherence. @Ceranthor: Would like to have your opinion on this as well. - LouisAragon (talk) 10:30, 3 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I think it would just be a matter of moving the existing text around. So that this part comes before the death of her husband: "Teresa was received by many of the royal houses of Europe during the voyages, such as English crown prince Henry Frederick and Queen Anne (her child's godparents) and contemporary writers and artists such as Thomas Herbert and Anthony van Dyck. According to Herbert, Robert Shirley "was the greatest Traveller of his time", but he admired the "undaunted Lady Teresa" even more." FunkMonk (talk) 18:14, 3 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Done. Please let me know what you think. - LouisAragon (talk) 16:26, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Looks good to me. FunkMonk (talk) 13:03, 11 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Tuson (2013) argues that Teresa's story has been overshadowed by "the partly selfcreated myth of the Shirley's"" What does this allude to?
  • Well, the Shirley brothers were the main figures in this whole topic, as ambassadors between East and West. They were the "stars", not Teresa. Furthermore, they actively promoted the stuff their contemporaries wrote/told about them. Having said that, I think any further information/explanation about that belongs on the articles about the Shirley's themselves, rather than this article. - LouisAragon (talk) 01:38, 19 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Made large scale adjustments and added quite a bit of information about this "myth". Should be much more clear now. - LouisAragon (talk) 05:04, 20 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • "An emancipated figure" Only stated in the intro which should not have unique info.
  • You could spell out Henry Frederick in the article body as well.
Unrelated note - @FunkMonk: thanks for that script; it is incredibly helpful for cleaning up overlinking (see my recent contributions ha). ceranthor 18:50, 30 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I'm trying to spread the word in as many reviews as I can, hehe... FunkMonk (talk) 19:34, 30 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@LouisAragon: I took care of the duplinks for you. ceranthor 18:33, 31 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • All the fixes look good, I still think it is more important than just a footnote to state their son died at a young age. FunkMonk (talk) 15:55, 20 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • @FunkMonk: (Actually had forgotten about that one) Done. Please let me know what you think. - LouisAragon (talk) 18:54, 20 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - fascinating subject, and the context since added is a nice touch. FunkMonk (talk) 21:01, 20 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Coordinator comments edit

@LouisAragon: Per the FAC instructions, please remove the "done" templates. Thanks! --Laser brain (talk) 18:24, 8 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Laser brain: Done! - LouisAragon (talk) 16:57, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@LouisAragon: This has made good progress but hasn't yet achieved consensus for promotion. I've added it to the Urgents list but it will have to be archived if it doesn't attract some more support. --Laser brain (talk) 13:57, 16 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I will support when my comments have been addressed, but nothing seems to have been done for a while. FunkMonk (talk) 14:18, 16 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I thought I had dealt with all mandatory points as I didn't receive any response after my final two comments.[9]-[10] Guess I was wrong there. @FunkMonk: Could you please tell which ones you'd still like to be adressed (i.e. "mandatory") before supporting? I suppose the "saving her husbands life" part? Thanks alot, - LouisAragon (talk) 14:54, 16 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Well, commonly, you would leave an answer to every point raised, explaining that/how you solved the issue or why you didn't, so that the reviewer knows what is what. FunkMonk (talk) 15:17, 16 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
LouisAragon, I think this is your first FAC? Sometimes those of us who spend time here don't realize some things aren't obvious. If you check the points that FunkMonk made which you have either not responded to (or which FunkMonk has followed up on with another question) and then note here if everything is addressed, then FunkMonk will take another look. Sometimes nominators can take a while to fix things, so reviewers often don't revisit until the nominator says they're ready for the reviewer to take another look. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 16:44, 16 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@FunkMonk: Aight, understood @Mike Christie: Yep its my first FAC. Ok, good to know. I'll address the remaining points in the next few days. - LouisAragon (talk) 16:51, 16 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Laser brain: Dealt with all remaining points. Three different users are now giving support. Best, - LouisAragon (talk) 23:52, 20 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Reading now, will provide my review soon. --Jens Lallensack (talk) 10:05, 22 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

From Jens Lallensack edit

  • The favourite of Emamqoli Khan, who still wanted to marry Teresa, sent his servants to the Carmelites in Isfahan to capture her. – confused: who is the "favourite" who send his servants?
  • Hi JL. Ceranthor asked me the same question, but "the favourite" is unfortunately not mentioned by name in the sources, nor are any further details known. - LouisAragon (talk) 17:25, 22 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hm, but is "favourite" meant in the same sense as defined in the article favourite? If not, maybe another term would be more fit? --Jens Lallensack (talk) 15:14, 23 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Teresa was buried at the convent – in the convent?
  • It does not become clear where precisely the grave is, "in the convent" is quite general, first I thought of a grave yard (it seems to be within the church Santa Maria della Scala according to the image caption, but that need to be stated in the text as well). Is the gravestone still accessible/open to public?
  • I agree that "in the convent" sounds a bit vague. The grave is located inside the church, according to the sources. Adjusted that as well. Please let me know what you think. - LouisAragon (talk) 17:25, 22 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • That's all quibbles I found. Prose is not always perfect (I sometimes had to re-read), but good enough to allow me to give my support once the above has been addressed. A very interesting article, thanks for that! --Jens Lallensack (talk) 13:25, 22 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

From Ian edit

Hi, although my colleague Laser brain was looking after this one I was thinking of just nipping in and promoting it when I walked through the comments above, but upon going through the article itself I had sufficient concerns that I think it best I recuse as coord and leave Laser brain to determine when and how to close. Before continuing, let me say I think it's great to see an article like this at FAC and I congratulate the nominator on a strong debut here.
My concerns generally relate to the use of quotes -- firstly I think we have too many; secondly I think too few, in particular several that offer opinions, are attributed inline; thirdly in at least one case I wonder if an individual author's opinions are being given too much weight. I'll go through these one by one up to but not including In popular culture:

  • The main sources that deal with Teresa's life are the "predictably semi-hagiographic" accounts stored in the archives of the Vatican and the Carmelite order... -- I can see this is sourced to one work, by Tuson, but I'd like to know clearly that it's she who's offering the quoted opinion.
  • Though the Chronicle of the Carmelites in Persia evidently portrays a positive image of Teresa, the accounts are considered to be "patchy" and "contradictory" on some occasions -- again sourced to Tuson but are "patchy" and "contradictory" her opinions or is she reporting a consensus among scholars? If the former, you'd have to say that she considers them so, not that this is general opinion, as it reads now.
  • "probably the first child born in England of Iranian descent" -- an interesting fact but not a memorable quote, can we just paraphrase?
  • "was still alive in 1622 when his English grandmother passed away, as confirmed by the annuity she bequeathed him" -- cited to two works so would need inline attribution but again not a memorable quote in itself so can we try paraphrasing?
  • A rather tough one; any suggestions about how to rephrase? - LouisAragon (talk) 01:10, 27 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • How about just He is believed to have survived until at least 1622, but to have died at a young age? Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 02:38, 27 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • the King advised her not to be afraid, "because it would be harder for him to put one woman to death than a hundred men" -- marginally worth keeping as a quote IMO, but needs attribution; cited to two works, and in any case is even one of those authors saying this or the King himself or another contemporary?
  • This is reportedly said by the king according to contemporaneous accounts (which are compiled in Chick & Matthee's work). Regarding the "Andrea 2019, p. 110" reference; it basically just gives a summary of Chick & Matthee's compilation of primary accounts in relation to the story, i.e. it doesn't include an unique statement by the author (just an additional ref to back up the Chick/Matthee source, basically). Anyways I added a few words to the sentence, please let me know what you think. - LouisAragon (talk) 01:10, 27 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • The In popular culture section is rife with quotes and quote fragments (five in the second sentence alone), some that probably don't need to be there, some that could stay but need attribution -- perhaps in light of my advice above you could work on that yourself and get back to me...
  • I find it difficult to rephrase these sentences as I believe the quoted material is pretty "on point". Do you have any suggestions? Thanks. - LouisAragon (talk) 01:10, 27 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Well, rather than make suggestions, I might just have a go at what I consider the worst offenders, then you can let me know here if I've misinterpreted anything, and what's left you can attribute inline, eh? Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 02:38, 27 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Okay Louis, I've tweaked and trimmed, leaving only "hybrid identities" and "exotic wife with an even more exotic life story" as unattributed quotes that I found intriguing or otherwise useful -- pls let me know what you think of the result and who was quoted in those two cases. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 02:58, 27 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Ian Rose: Hey! Thanks, looks perfectly fine to me. I just addressed the two quotes as well as the "died young" part (per your earlier suggestion). Please let me know what you think. - LouisAragon (talk) 01:55, 31 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 08:41, 26 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • @Ian Rose: Hi, thank you for your comments/feedback. Pinged you just to make sure. - LouisAragon (talk) 01:10, 27 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Tks Louis -- your changes so far look fine to me. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 02:38, 27 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Tks for your latest changes, Louis -- I did play around with the phrasing a bit but have hopefully left the meaning intact.
  • Happy to support, and hope to see more of your work here. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 17:15, 31 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Teresa_Sampsonia/archive1&oldid=876711153"