Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Siege of Hüningen (1796–97)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article promoted by Peacemaker67 (talk) via MilHistBot (talk) 00:06, 25 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Siege of Hüningen (1796–97) edit

Nominator(s): auntieruth (talk)

I am nominating this article for A-Class review to see if it meets the criteria. The article follows the layout and content of similar articles submitted to A-class review. I appreciate any constructive feedback. I hope you enjoy the read. auntieruth (talk) 16:52, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

CommentsSupport by MisterBee1966 edit

Very nice article, I only have a few remarks. MisterBee1966 (talk) 08:11, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You have "4 kilometers (2.5 mi)" and the ".5 miles (0.80 km)". I suggest to keep it consistent, either always km/mi or mi/km

fixed!

"Hüningen is located in Alsace-Lorraine", I thought it is good practice to also state the current name. It could read "Hüningen, present-day Huningue, is located in Alsace-Lorraine". Germans tend to be overly careful as not give the impression that we still have some claim be referring to these places by their former German names.

fixed!

second mention of Karl Aloys zu Fürstenberg "under command of Karl Aloys zu Fürstenberg", is his full name required here?

fixed!

You have the following sources in the list but I believe they are not referenced, mayby move to further reading?

Arnold, James R. Marengo & Hohenlinden. Barnsley, South Yorkshire, UK: Pen & Sword, 2005. ISBN 978-0967098500

removed

(German) Charles, Archduke of Austria. Ausgewählte Schriften weiland seiner kaiserlichen Hoheit des Erzherzogs Carl von Österreich. Wien, W. Braumüller, 1893–94.

placed correctly

Blanning, Timothy. The French Revolutionary Wars, New York: Oxford University Press, 1998. ISBN 978-0340569115

placed correctly

Bourdet, Jacques. The Ancient Art of Warfare: The Modern Ages; 1700 to Our Times, From Peter the Great to Eisenhower, Soldiers of Cannons, Tanks, and Planes. Volume 2: The Ancient Art of Warfare, The Ancient Art of Warfare. R. Laffont, 1968. OCLC 21409

see footnote 36

Sloane, W.M. Life of Napoleon. France, 1896 (reprint, 1910).
removed

The list of sources should be sorted alphabetically. Philippart, John seems out of sequence

fixed

Support nicely done! Do you have plans to work on "Battle of Großbeeren" at some stage? While at University, and after the Berlin Wall came down, I biked there a few times. Someday I have to tell you the story how I met Willy Brandt and when Ronald Reagan gave his speech at the Berlin Wall, I was there too. MisterBee1966 (talk) 21:11, 12 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Dudley Miles edit

"present-day Department of Haut-Rhin". I would add "in France". done
If Huningen was then in the Canton of Basel City was it then in Switzerland? I assume that it was in an area of Switzerland which had been captured by France but this needs spelling out.

in contested space per lead. borders were not as they are today. A village surrounded by a Swiss canton could be "owned" by a Habsburg, and vice versa.

You say in the next paragraph that the Austrians pushed the French back but it would be helpful to go a bit further back in the background, even if only a few words - e.g. following the French Revolution, Republican armies invaded Switzerland and Germany.
German states. Which German states?
"at besieged Mantua". Does not sound grammatical to me.

it is. in this case besieged is an adjective modifying Mantua.

"At the end of the Rhine Campaign of 1795 the two sides called a truce." When? done
"Coalition Army" Which countries were in the coalition? fixed
"under François Antoine Louis Bourcier, Henri François Delaborde" Bourcier and Delaborde? fixed
"in some places more than four or more times wider than in the twenty-first century, even under regular conditions." "under regular conditions" sounds odd to me. fixed
"In the late Middle Ages, the village belonged to the house of Habsburg, a portion of family inheritance; by the late seventeenth century, although the village itself belong to the city of Basel." This is confusing and ungrammatical. fixed
"Napoleon flatly refused, believing Mantua the keystone to Habsburg Italy" You say this twice. fixed
'Aftermath' section. The first part seems about the background, and to repeat comments above. fixed
Dudley Miles (talk) 18:51, 14 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

thx for your sensible comments. I've addressed them I think. auntieruth (talk) 00:35, 16 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Looks good, although I would still like more on the background and the German states. Dudley Miles (talk) 16:06, 17 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

such as what on background and the German states? auntieruth (talk) 19:20, 18 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

added a great deal more background, and a couple of images. auntieruth (talk) 18:12, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I gave support as I am happy that the article is A class standard. My qualification was that that you did not deal with a couple of my comments. 1. German states - what German states, this is never explained. 2. I would have liked a sentence or two going back before 1795 on the background e.g. After the French Revolution the European monarchies invaded France to attempt to restore the monarchy, but the French fought back and invaded Germany and Switzerland in 1795. Dudley Miles (talk) 21:52, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I added a note on the German states: I'm guessing you mean present-day states. I also added a note on which Swiss states. Haven't dealt with the Swiss revolution, because it hadn't happened yet. auntieruth (talk) 15:55, 21 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

added a map and some text on the plethora of German states involved in this dispute. Do you think this should be duplicated in the article on the siege of Kehl? auntieruth (talk) 16:47, 21 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I found the large scale map showing the plethora of small states involved particularly helpful and I think something similar would be useful for the Kehl article. 13:44, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

Support: I reviewed this at GAN and see that it has been improved further since then. I made a couple of minor tweaks today (please adjust if you think necessary). I'm happy that this meets A-class requirements, but have a couple of minor comments/suggestions:
"File:Abbatucci monument in Huningen.jpg" currently has a date of 4 November 2014, but that is the date of upload. I think it actually needs to be changed to the date the photograph was taken (i.e. 1906)
for the above file, I'd also suggest cropping the caption off it. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 01:44, 29 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments. As always, feel free to revert my copyediting. - Dank (push to talk)

I made an edit to address the following points:
"klein Hüningen, or petite Huningue, or little Huningen": I'm confused. The reader will be wondering at this point what the significance of "klein Hüningen" is, and also wondering why it isn't capitalized if it's a village. Also, why are we giving the name in three languages? Most people who are interested in German or French won't need to be told what klein or petite mean; for readers who aren't interested in learning new words in foreign languages, foreign words generally reduce readability. Also, I checked 4 dictionaries, and got no hits on "ethnies".
Judging from the first few sections, the prose looks good enough to head to FAC. I copyedited down to ~~Preliminaries to the siege~~ Political terrain. These are my edits. - Dank (push to talk) 21:48, 30 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

A lot of work's clearly gone into this - comments follow:
The lead didn't really explain what the wider conflict was or why the siege was happening (although the infobox gives us some details)

expanded some of this.

The lead also didn't say very much about the actual siege itself; is there any chance of getting more of the "conduct of the siege" information into it?

expanded some of this.

"At the end of the Rhine Campaign of 1795 the two sides called a truce in January 1796" - which two sides? (this is the first sentence of the article proper, and they haven't yet been introduced)

expanded this

" counted 90,000 troops. " - counted, or "comprised"?

sure. fixed.

"the inherent jealousies and competition between generals" - was these between all generals, or between the generals involved in this campaign?
yes and yes, but that is clarified.
"In the late Middle Ages, the village belonged to the house of Habsburg," - which village?
"Contemporary sources place the following at the siege:" - is there any reason to be suspicious of these sources? If not, could the "contemporary" bit be removed? (NB: the source given here is Michel, who isn't in the bibliography)

both contemporary sources and some others, but the contemporary ones differ a bit from the 20th century sources, which are much more general. Michel=Mechel....and that is fixed now.

I think the MOS would prefer "2 battalions" etc. as "two battalions", but happy to be corrected by others!

I'll do it either way. Generally, it should be two, but since it was parenthetical....)

At the FA level, I'd be wondering if the "preliminaries to the siege" isn't too long compared to what then follows, but that wouldn't stop me supporting at ACR. Hchc2009 (talk) 15:46, 6 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

preliminaries keeps being expanded or contracted depending on the reviewers' tastes. See for example, Dudley's comments above. I've expanded somewhat more, because of your comments. It's a fine line.
- THANKS for your comments. Please have another look. auntieruth (talk) 17:18, 8 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

G'day Hchc2009. Are you insisting on these changes? Because if not, I'll be listing this for promotion on the basis of consensus. Regards, Peacemaker67 (crack... thump) 10:03, 20 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No, at ACR I'd be happy to support without any changes to the preliminiaries. Hchc2009 (talk) 11:53, 20 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.