Talk:Charles De Geer/GA2

GA Review

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

Nominator: Yakikaki (talk · contribs) 17:15, 5 July 2024 (UTC)

Reviewer: Chiswick Chap (talk · contribs) 10:20, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

Comments

• Noted the comments in GA1, and your replies.

• Terms in the lead like "also" and "a number of" are basically redundant, we'd be better off without them.

• Removed most of them, hope it's better?

• Sure.

• Perhaps "Charles the Entomologist" should be in the lead, and in boldface with a redirect from that term to here?

• Good point, fixed.

• Löfstabruk (also spelled Leufstabruk, Löfstabruk) developed - Perhaps the first mention should be spelt with a "v" to make sense of this?

• Of course! Fixed.

• In 1738, his father died and Charles moved from Utrecht to Lövstabruk. By then preparations had already been undertaken for Charles to move back to Sweden and be introduced to the running of the estate. - is a bit repetitive. For example, this could be worded "In 1738, his father died and Charles moved from Utrecht to Lövstabruk, as planned, to be introduced to the running of the estate."

• Fixed.

• The rest of that paragraph repeatedly says "running of the estate", "management of the estate". This could be condensed.

• Tried to fix, hope it's better now?

• Definitely.

• When there are 2 images in a section, I'd put the first one on the left.

• Looks good.

• I've done a very small bit of copy-editing.

• Thank you!

• The last volume was edited by De Geer on his deathbed. -> De Geer edited the last volume on his deathbed.

• Fixed.

• De Geer participated in public life. He was present ... -> In public life, De Geer was present ...

• Fixed.

• At second mention, Carl Gustav Tessin -> Tessin.

• Fixed.

• I don't think we need italics for "knight" and "Commander Grand Cross" in English.

• Fixed.

• I feel that the scientific career section rather underplays his scientific contributions. The paragraph on debunking cuckoospit and spontaneous generation is a good start, but the next paragraph, covering his main work, says little other than that he did a lot of work. Can we hear (or see) a bit more about what these pests were, and what he found out about them? What did he discover about insect metamorphosis? Other findings?

• On it.

• I've added what I have been able to get from my sources, which are frustratingly vague on the actual content of the Mémoires. I did however manage to find some interesting bits and pieces which I've added. I had overlooked that he had emphasised the role of insects as pollinators, which is strangely and sadly topical today. I thought I might put a line about that in the lead as well. In any case, let me know if you think it is sufficient. If not I will have to do some very deep digging, I think.

Images

• Portrait needs a US PD tag on Commons.
• Swan image seems to be wrongly licensed, should be PD-art|PD-old-100 and PD-1923. CC didn't exist till 2001.
• Same for Small Tortoiseshell image.
• Same for Memoires image.

• I hope and think I've got these right now, but please double check.

• I'd suggest the 'Portrait and title page' image be made wider as it's a double-page spread, while the Small Tortoiseshell image should be upright. To save faffing about I've made these small formatting changes, feel free to adjust them.

• Looks very nice IMO.

• He made all the illustrations - this is remarkable (paralleled probably only by Thomas Bewick, who was however nowhere near as scientific; has anyone compared the two men?). I think we should have a small gallery at the end of 'Scientific career' to illustrate the variety of his illustrations: you might want to show examples of each of the insect orders he covers in most detail, for instance, to give readers an idea of his taxonomic range, or examples of larvae, adults, damage to plants, etc to show his coverage of life-cycles and ecological and economic impact.

• I think a gallery would be more than justified; at the moment we have a swan (not by De Geer) and one butterfly: this doesn't in any way do justice to the man's work or artistic skill.

Good point and great idea, I wish I had thought of it myself. I did something of a variation based on your suggestion, what do you think? I thought it might be more curious like this, and I had trouble settling on any criteria for choosing among all his drawings otherwise. The aphids I like because they're also mentioned in the article.

Sources

• Shouldn't De Geer's works be listed somewhere here? At least a single entry for his Memoires.

• I was about to try to extrapolate the list from LIBRIS (which is already linked to in the "External links" section) but found it slightly overwhelming, since many are short articles or booklets with very long, charmingly baroque names, most in Swedish or Latin, and in the end I asked myself if such a list wouldn't be a bit too much for the general reader, considering there is already a link..? Clearly his main work by far are the Mémoires, in any case. But I can of course include a list.

• All the spot-checks I tried check out.

Summary

A fascinating article. My feeling is that it's basically ready for GA but that it rather underplays De Geer's artistic skill and scientific ideas. The former should be fixed with an image gallery of his illustrations. The latter may imply some discussion of his zoology. Chiswick Chap (talk) 11:15, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

Thank you Chiswick Chap for taking the time to review the article. I'll get back in the coming days to address the points above. All the best, Yakikaki (talk) 07:21, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks again Chiswick Chap for a very helpful review, I think the article already gained a lot from your kind interventions and suggestions. I have tried to address all the point above. Let me know of any remaining, or new, issues you'd like me to work on. Yakikaki (talk) 19:13, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

Excellent work, I really like what you've done to the Science section. The article is certainly up to GA standard now, and I hope you'll take it further. If you can spare the time to review an article from the GAN list, that too would be much appreciated. Chiswick Chap (talk) 19:19, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

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.