Talk:Pavel Schilling/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Aza24 (talk · contribs) 02:08, 2 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Happy to review this article, looks rather interesting. Aza24 (talk) 02:08, 2 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Aza24. Thanks very much for reviewing. SpinningSpark 08:04, 2 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Text

"also known as" – "better known as" might be more to the point
- That would not be correct, he is better known as Pavel, not Paul. That is certainly true in modern times; the Anglicising of his name to Paul is mostly found in 19th cewntury sources. SpinningSpark 15:46, 11 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I wonder if you might consider linking electrochemical and electromagnetic – partly because most readers are probably relatively unfamiliar with the terms (especially the latter) but mainly to differentiate from each
- Done. I was reluctant to link those terms because they are both part of a <foo> telegraph phrase, and the links don't really help the reader understand how those telegraphs functioned. Electromagnetic especially, which redirects to electromagnetism is not very relevant except in a very general way. I've linked instead to electromechanics which is a slight Easter Egg, but is a little more relevant and at least mentions telegraphy. SpinningSpark 16:04, 11 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
if coil refers to Electromagnetic coil and submarine cables to Submarine communications cable I would link as well (since they seem to be mostly specialist terms)
- Done the coil. Submarine communications cable is already linked in the place where underwater telegraph cables are explicitly discussed. I have not linked in the lead because that would be misleading. Schilling's first application for his cable was to detonate mines. That might be sending a message to the enemy, but I wouldn't exactly call it communication. SpinningSpark 16:13, 11 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Page number(s) for ref 1 needed
- I've removed the cite. It's page 709, which is the same as the cite for the following sentence. SpinningSpark 16:20, 11 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Minor thing but "He was" is used four times in the early life section – since it's a rather small section, a little variation may be worth considering
Is F. I. Schubert's full name known?
- _{That's Theodor von Schubert (Fyodor Ivanovich as Russian subject). Retired electrician (talk) 14:33, 3 October 2020 (UTC)}[reply]
  - Thank you Mr. Electrician, I'll put that in. SpinningSpark 16:20, 11 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  - @Retired electrician:. On second thoughts, how do you know it was Theodor von Schubert? His son, Frederick von Schubert seems a much more likely candidate since he was head of cartography in the army accoding to his article. But in any case, neither of them match the middle initial of "I" from my source. SpinningSpark 16:51, 11 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    - F.I. = russified to Fyodor Ivanovich (Фёдор Иванович). His son was F. F. (Fyodor Fyodorovich, Фёдор Фёдорович). Born in 1789, he was too young for the job. Fourteen-year-old officers were quite common in field armies then, but certainly not in topographic units. Retired electrician (talk) 18:01, 11 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    - My apologies for delaying with this 1963 Yarotsky book. The four libraries whose online catalogues said they had this book... don't have it (Russian libraries aint much better than Russian government, duh). Plus there's another round of lockout, very inconvenient working hours. Retired electrician (talk) 18:01, 11 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
      - @Spinningspark: got the book! will ping later, Retired electrician (talk) 14:58, 12 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Is it known where he his "cartographical surveying duties" took place?
- My source doesn't expand on that. SpinningSpark 16:51, 11 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"Family circumstances" is rather vague here, could this perhaps be tweaked a little to give more info to the reader?
- Again, my source doesn't expand on that. I would read that as code for financial problems, but I don't know. SpinningSpark 16:51, 11 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I have no idea what a "language officer" is... (translator?)
- _{He was an unimportant, junior clerk at the embassy, any "titles" were really irrelevant. Translation was rarely required, because all the Europe and the court in St.Petersburg spoke French and/or German. Translation to/from Russian was not necessary (many Russian ministers did not know a word in Russian, and nobody really cared...) Retired electrician (talk) 14:37, 3 October 2020 (UTC)}[reply]
- Yes, I agree that translator is not exactly accurate. I would read that as meaning he was able to speak the language of the country he was posted to, which as an ethnic German he was naturally able to do. But again, my source gives the title without expanding on it. By the way, user:Retired electrician, I'm happy for you to make the additions/changes you suggested earlier. I'm not really willing to make changes myself based on Russian language sources since I am unable to read that language. SpinningSpark 16:51, 11 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"His duties as a diplomat were light. He was left him with time on his hands, much of which he spent with Sömmerring,[7] and he brought many Russian dignitaries to see Sömmerring's apparatus.[8]" may be simpler as "Since his duties as a diplomat were light, he spent much time with Sömmerring, and brought many..."
- Done SpinningSpark 17:01, 11 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"very excitable" is a rather odd choice of words, as far as I know "excitable" typically refers to someone been too excited or over excited, surely that is not something we can judge, unless a source has explicitly said so?
- Schilling said he was being very childish. That together with playing pranks on the Tsar and several of his explosions seeming to be for the entertainment of onlookers rather than any scientific purpose makes me think that "excitable" is a fair summary of his behaviour. Small child with too much sugar springs to mind. Do you have a better suggestion? SpinningSpark 17:01, 11 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"the Tsar's tent" – which Tsar?
- _{By timing, it's none other than Alexander I. But the whole affair might need second source. Next week I'll pick up the definitive book on Schilling (Яроцкий 1963), double-check the episodes and then make up a separate bio to clarify the disputed statement in the lead. Right not, it's still factually incorrect. Retired electrician (talk) 14:46, 3 October 2020 (UTC)}[reply]
  - I thought it was Nicholas I, but I'll check my source. SpinningSpark 17:03, 11 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    - Yes, the source says Nicholas I (on the basis he was the last Tsar mentioned) and thus the event was after the Napoleonic period, which I have also clarified. SpinningSpark 15:00, 13 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
ref for note 1?
- Done SpinningSpark 15:08, 13 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"He met with Alois Senefelder," may work better as "In 1816 he met with Alois Senefelder," – do avoid the extra comma later
- Done SpinningSpark 15:08, 13 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"as a revolutionary idea" in that sentence doesn't really make sense the way it's phrased at the moment. I think I know what you're trying to say here but I think rephrasing is worthwhile.
- Done SpinningSpark 15:39, 13 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
It would be nice to link I Ching since it is likely not a familiar source to most English readers, maybe phrase to "inspired by hexagrams from I Ching which he had become familiar with in Mongolia"
- Done SpinningSpark 15:39, 13 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
What's the reasoning for using the old style date for 21 October 1832 but new style for his birth date earlier?
- Because the source (Yarotsky) is in OS and I didn't want to convert myself, it's too easy to get that wrong, but I think the answer is 2 November 1832. Yarotsky gives conversions for some of his dates but not that one. SpinningSpark 15:39, 13 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Is it known what he died from?
- _{Cancer. We know that in May 1837, just when Schilling received the government' RFP for the Peterhof-Kronstadt telegraph line, he contacted physician ru:Арендт, Николай Фёдорович, was diagnosed with a tumour, and soon slipped into a slow agony that lasted two months. Retired electrician (talk) 14:46, 3 October 2020 (UTC)}[reply]
  - Please put that in the article if you have a source, which I assume you do. SpinningSpark 15:48, 13 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure what is so "far" about "Schilling took the project as far as ordering the submarine cable from a rope factory in St. Petersburg"
- I don't see the problem. It means he got the project to the stage of ordering materials, which anyone in civil engineering will tell you is a fairly late stage in any project. So he got it a long way, or "far". SpinningSpark 15:48, 13 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The first sentence of the legacy section is weirdly phrased with the five commas
- Done SpinningSpark 16:31, 13 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
ref for note 4? (What page does he give it on)
- Done SpinningSpark 16:31, 13 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

General

Is there another image that could be used? One would be helpful somewhere in the early life to Return to diplomacy sections
- If I had more images, I would use them. SpinningSpark 17:16, 13 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Reading about the mines, it sounds like he pinoneer/invented remote mines; looking back at the lead with "Other technological interests included..." I don't think this phrasing gives him enough credit! I wonder if it may be appropriate to include that he is an "inventor" (or something like that if there's a more appropriate term) in the first line of the lead as well – the absence of such information seems very odd.
- Done SpinningSpark 17:16, 13 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Overall

Spinningspark, overall this was a very educating and enjoyable read. My comments are mostly on prose and continuity so there's no major issues here. I'll put this hold for a week for you address these issues. If for some reason you need extra time do let me know, but there's not much to fix here! Aza24 (talk) 22:58, 2 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Courtesy ping: @Spinningspark:. Are you going to be able to adress these issues soon? If you need more time, just let me know – I just want to know where we are on this. Aza24 (talk) 22:29, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Sorry, I have not had much time to devote to Wikipedia recently. I'm working through it now. SpinningSpark 15:33, 11 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  - Ah no worries, please take your time with this one then, the world is too chaotic right now to ask for anything else! Aza24 (talk) 20:08, 11 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    - I probably won't find much time tomorrow, but I'll definitely be back on it on Tuesday. SpinningSpark 22:41, 11 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Aza24: I think I have responded to everything now. User:Retired electrician may be able/willing to improve the article further with Russian language sources, but there is nothing more I can add. SpinningSpark 17:19, 13 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This article is shaping up very nicely. A few remaining comments:
- I would suggest "enthusiastic" instead of "excitable", or just "excitable" without the "very" since using "very" creates redundancy when excitable by itself already means "over excitement" Aza24 (talk) 22:13, 14 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  - Done. SpinningSpark 15:02, 15 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- I still find it odd tht Schilling isn't described as an "inventor/electrician" in the first sentence (e.g. "was a Russian inventor, military officer and diplomat of Baltic German origin"), is there a reason for this? Aza24 (talk) 22:13, 14 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  - It's the way it is because engineering was not Schilling's "day job", except perhaps in the late stage of his career. He was not a trained engineer. I've avoided claiming he invented the electromagnetic telegraph. He certainly built the first one that was of any use, but the idea of an electromagnetic telegraph had been floated almost immediately that Oersted discovered electric currents could deflect magnetic needles, starting with a paper by Ampere in 1820. SpinningSpark 15:02, 15 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- @Retired electrician: do you have a source you could insert to cite his death from cancer? Aza24 (talk) 22:13, 14 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  - Added on talk page. Use at will, I'm not sure how to insert it correctly into current layout. Retired electrician (talk) 23:08, 14 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    - @Retired electrician: Don't worry about getting cite formatting consistent. I'm happy to make the cites consistent afterwards if necessary. What I'm not happy to do is add information to the article based on sources I can't read. SpinningSpark 15:02, 15 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
      - Ok uh well, I think the article meets the criteria now anyways. Aza24 (talk) 00:29, 17 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Feel free to disagree but Sömmerring seems to be a significant figure in his life, and is especially discussed in the "Diplomatic career" section – you could add a picture of him there? (or painting, more likely) Aza24 (talk) 22:13, 14 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  - Done SpinningSpark 20:17, 15 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Good work here Spinningspark, I am confident the article now meets the GA criteria. Passing now – congratulations!