Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Peer review/Frederick III, German Emperor/archive1

< Wikipedia:Peer review

Frederick III, German Emperor

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I'd like this article to be improved overall as much as possible with the eventual aim of FA in mind. It has already been through a GA Review and A Class review and I want to give it a thorough review from some fresh eyes before submitting it to FAC.

Thanks, Banime (talk) 15:13, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Jappalang

edit

Based on this version

Layout

Infobox

  • The "Issues" part is messy... Can something be done to align the parameters with the rest of the box...?
    Not really sure how to fix this... I'll try to ask someone. --Banime (talk) 15:44, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Lead

  • Why are there two German translation templates?
    I moved one of them to later in the lead. One is the translation of his official title and name after becoming emperor, one is his name before becoming emperor. Hopefully it is more clear now. --Banime (talk) 15:43, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "and was a commander during"
Let us make it more active voice (and in line with the first clause): "and commanded an army in".
Done. --Banime (talk) 15:43, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Frederick III was celebrated"
Change to "He was celebrated" (no point repeating his name).
Done. --Banime (talk) 15:43, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "After the wars, his father, now German Emperor, lived to the age of 90, postponing Frederick's reign over Prussia for 27 years and his reign over Germany for 17 years."
Okay, this is just plain weird... is there some edict, judgment, or ruling that stated Federick was supposed to rule over those countries and his daddy by having a long life unjustly denied him this? "Postphone" would mean something was arranged for, and was delayed. Was the death of William I foretold or something? Something does not strike me as correct here.
I changed the word postponing to prevented. However you still may have a problem with it. One of the things historians bring up is the length of his father's reign. Living to 90 is unusual for the time, even today it is not exactly common or expected. In the 1800s it was very long indeed. Many people expected him to die earlier, to be frank. So when he lived 17 years after becoming German Emperor it prevented Frederick from ruling. I think I bring up later in the Legacy section that historian Tipton brings up the exact question "what if his father died sooner?" and maybe I can work with that. But yeah this is a bit difficult to change and if you have any other ideas please let me know as I want to make sure it perfectly hits the meaning without being confusing or misleading. --Banime (talk) 15:43, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, but this can be contentious. Giving the idea that "Frederick should have ruled and his father should have died earlier." without context or source is taking a stance on the matter (hence, POV-ish). A suggestion follows:
"After the wars, Prussia and the other German states united as Germany. Frederick's father, King William I, lived to the age of 90, reigning Prussia for 27 years and Germany for 17. His father's longevity ensured that Frederick would only succeed the throne at the age of 57, which was beyond the Prussian's average expectation of life in the 1890s."
Probably the "426 out of 1000 men born in Prussia survive to the age of 50 years" from Volume 1, p. 20 of The Victorian City by H. J. Dyos, Michael Wolff can be used as the source for the last clause (I would still suggest to locate more or better sources if this route is taken, Urban Mortality Change in England and Germany, 1870-1913 by Jörg Vögele seems to have potential). Jappalang (talk) 01:10, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Okay I used your suggestion and citation as well. I checked the Urban Mortality change source but couldn't find anything else that would help. I'll keep looking to see if additional citations can be found but right now I think it is decent as well. --Banime (talk) 23:41, 29 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Frederick, despite following his family's militaristic tradition, had liberal tendencies due to his ties with Britain"
How are militarism and liberalism in opposition to each other? Are liberals pacifists in nature? Militarism <-> Pacifism. Conservative <-> Liberal.
His family is generally bound by tradition, holds the monarchy in very high esteem, and is conservative. I added "conservative" family traditions to hopefully make this more clear in the contrast. --Banime (talk) 15:43, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "his time growing up during the Revolutions of 1848."
Besides the "Noun plus -ing", does that mean anyone who grew up during the Revolutions of 1848 would become a liberal?
I added that it contributed to him being liberal. It was a liberal revolution and anyone growing up during the time would have taken something away from it. Yes not everyone was liberal who grew up during it but it was a contributing factor. Hopefully that is clearer now, and if you have more suggestions for this sentence let me know because I do not want to be misleading or pov. --Banime (talk) 15:43, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It would be more accurate to state what part of the Revolutions affected Frederick. Did the Prussian prince participate in any of the activites that led to the Revolution (participation)? Was he friends with any of the revolutions' leaders (friendship)? Was he, instead, affected by what he saw during the Revolution (witnessing of events)? Jappalang (talk) 01:10, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I looked everywhere for a source which claimed this (I could have sworn there were specific mentions of actions during the revolutions that he disagreed with) but came up empty. Perhaps it was just words from my professor that contributed to this. I'll leave this out for now, and perhaps later I'll mention that he grew up during the revolutions but won't say how/why/if it affected him. It can give the context of his youth at the very least. If I ever find what I remember reading I will add the specific things that affected him during the revolution. --Banime (talk) 23:27, 29 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
That seems to be a good idea. Jappalang (talk) 01:14, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Specifically, to Bismarck's powers or to the position itself (i.e. regardless of whoever occupies the position)? If the latter, then why name the position in the possesion of Bismarck?
I changed it to just "chancellor". --Banime (talk) 15:43, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Early life

  • "His father, Prince William of Prussia was a younger brother of King Frederick William IV of Prussia. Prussia, at the time, was recovering militarily and otherwise from the aftermath of the Napoleonic Wars."
Repetitious "Prussia"s, especially the "Prussia. Prussia". Any way to space them out or reduce their use...?
Done. --Banime (talk) 16:05, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "His mother, Princess Augusta of Saxe-Weimar, had been brought up in a very different atmosphere."
I feel there is some disconnection... Here I believe that we are comparing Augusta's upbringing to William's since the text seems to be leading up to their incompatibility. However, William's childhood history was not mentioned (note: "Prussia, at the time, was recovering militarily and otherwise from the aftermath of the Napoleonic Wars." can be taken as the reign of William IV "at that time", not the childhood years of the mentioned royals.)
Done, I believe. --Banime (talk) 16:05, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I better showed their incompatibility now, with citations. --Banime (talk) 23:00, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "due to her unequal rank"
Unequal rank?? She is a princess albeit a "relatively minor" one. He was forced to give her up as his parents looked down on her peerage (bloodline) or domains. Perhaps, "His parents, however, felt Elisa's peerage would not befit a bride of the Prussian royal family and forced him to marry a more dynastically suitable Princess."
Done. --Banime (talk) 16:05, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "which he did out of duty."
Perhaps this can be dropped as he "was forced".
Done. --Banime (talk) 16:05, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "dominated by his ill-matched parents."
Aside from the forced marriage, we do not know much of William's character and background to back up this judgment. The "ill-match[ing]" seems a conclusion that is derived from half a question (like "Ax + ? = 6"). I think William deserves some discussion to illustrate his values that clashed against Augusta's.
Hmm.. okay. This one will take a bit longer I'll need to research a bit more to get some good references on his life. As you can tell the wikipedia articles aren't even that helpful and are poorly sourced (maybe I'll do William I or II next). --Banime (talk) 16:05, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I showed this better now, with citations. --Banime (talk) 23:00, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I copyedited a bit to make the sentences flow better. Hopefully, it did the job... Jappalang (talk) 01:10, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "He had one sister, Louise, later Grand Duchess of Baden. Although Frederick was eight years Louise's senior, the two siblings were very close."
Is eight years such a big gap that sibilings cannot be close? There are many siblings royal or otherwise who are of two years difference but yet cold to each other... Suggesting, "He had one sister, Louise, later Grand Duchess of Baden, who was eight years his junior and very close to him."
Done. --Banime (talk) 16:05, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "During this time Frederick also lived through the Revolutions of 1848 which, along with his liberal family members and education, contributed to him having liberal beliefs early in life."
Instead of "him having", it should be "his having". Furthermore, it is hard to fathom how "living through an event" would contribute to his beliefs... Moreover, I thought his paternal side of the family was conservative (or was it militaristic)? Suggestion: "Aside from the Revolutions of 1848, Frederick's mother and his education were key influences on his set of mind in early life." We can then let the reader later decide how "liberal" he was, bearing the events that happened.
I could do that if needed, but the source talks about his liberal beliefs early in his life. I'll need to look at this some more and see what I can do. --Banime (talk) 16:05, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
As per what I suggested for the lead, instead of "living through and event", state what experiences through it specifically influenced the prince. Jappalang (talk) 01:10, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, as I said above I couldn't find the source for now. I changed it just to show that he grew up during the revolutions (for context) but didn't say how it affected him. --Banime (talk) 23:31, 29 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Education

  • "The Hohenzollern family traditionally valued a military education;"
I think we can drop "a" and the semi-colon can be replaced with a period depending on the following suggestion.
Done. --Banime (talk) 22:23, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Frederick's mother insisted that her son be educated according to liberal ideas."
If Frederick is given military education along with the teachings his mother thought he should have, then "... education. Frederick's mother insisted that her son should also be educated according to liberal ideas." If however, through Augusta's insistance, his military education was superceded or replaced by liberal education, then "... education; however, Frederick's mother insisted that her son be educated according to liberal ideas."
He was taught both, so I used the first suggestion. --Banime (talk) 22:23, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Therefore his education was closely supervised and thorough."
Was this close supervision due to having two doctrines (military and liberal) taught to him, or was it due to the mother's insistence? Why or how would it be considered thorough?
I clarified this in the article I believe now. It was thorough in the sense that both doctrines were taught when usually just the military was taught to Hohenzollern princes. I removed the close supervision part as I could not find that in any source. --Banime (talk) 22:23, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "He was a talented student and was particularly good at foreign languages."
I think we can drop the second "was".
Done. --Banime (talk) 22:23, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Frederick was good at gymnastics and became a very good rider, as required of a Prussian Prince."
Eh, a Prussian Prince should be good at gymnastics?
I believe this source is for both of these, I'll try to look up the source while I'm here in Germany since this is a German source and confirm. Or find another one. --Banime (talk) 22:23, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Okay I could not find a copy of the source. If you think it is problematic or controversial to say he was good at gymnastics then I'll remove it, however I think whoever cited it meant it for both. It could be possible that he just cited the riding part of it and the gymnastics part was not cited though. I'll leave it how it is and keep looking if I can ever confirm it, if you think that will be okay. If you think its a big problem, like I said, I'll remove the gymnastics part. --Banime (talk) 22:46, 29 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I would not readily advocate its removal (knowing the Prince's skill set lends a bit of character). The issue is more of "is a Prussian Prince required to be good at gymnastics (aside from necessary equestrian skills)" as hinted by the original sentence. If there is no source that gymnastics is a requirement, it would be best to separate it clearly from the "required of a Prussian Prince" part. Two separate sentences, perhaps? Jappalang (talk) 01:14, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I found in Roehl (which is about William, Frederick's son and successor) numerous passages discussing how William had to learn gymnastics. One shows how Vicky ensured he practiced twice daily, later on it says he had numerous tutors to teach him French, English, Riding, History, and Gymnastics, and he had another tutor earlier in his life to teach him gymnastics as well. Now this isn't conclusive that it means all Prussian Princes need to learn gymnastics, I think it lends more proof that gymnastics and riding were required of Prussian Princes, since Frederick did while he was a prince and so did William, his son and prince. Check page 170 of Young Wilhelm here and see if you agree that its an appropriate conclusion. --Banime (talk) 12:11, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Another thing I found here on page 67 of Beyond the Gymnasium simply states that gymnastics was required in the perfect education of young men (a German said this), so we could remove the as required of Prussian Princes part and say as required of German young men, or something. Or just take it out all together to remove any possible POV. --Banime (talk) 12:17, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
From the two sources you provided, it appears Gymnastics is a subject encouraged for all young men to take up. On p. 214 in Young Wilhelm, Wilhelm criticized that gymnastics is no longer fun for the boys, and the book seems to state gymnasiums as centres of education (its teachings of discipline and physical conditioning suit those in military positions). Beyond the Gymnasium pretty much establishes that, as well as stating that gymnastics was looked down upon and disproved until Frederick William III encouraged it. I think, whereas equestrian skill is pretty much backed up by source to be a required noble skill, gymnastics is shown to be a physical conditioning practiced by the educated. How would "Frederick excelled in gymnastics, and as required of a Prussian Prince, became a very good rider." sound? Jappalang (talk) 13:17, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, sounds great. I think this is the best solution, done. Thanks. --Banime (talk) 13:41, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Like all Hohenzollern princes he became familiar from a young age with the military traditions of the dynasty."
This would suggest that he was not taught the traditions but rather became familiar through everyday experiences (e.g. watching parades, listening to conversations, etc).
I clarified this I believe. --Banime (talk) 22:23, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "and was invested"
Drop the "was".
Done. --Banime (talk) 22:23, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "expected to become"
Change to "expected to be".
Done. --Banime (talk) 22:23, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Later, breaking with Hohenzollern tradition, he became the first Hohenzollern prince to pursue academic studies."
What age did this occur? This can help to refine the sentence, as such: "At the age of xx, he broke from family tradition, becoming the first Hohenzollern prince to pursue academic studies."
Done. I'm going to do further research to ensure that his age wasn't actually 19 (winter of 1850, I believe it was before his 19th birthday).--Banime (talk) 22:23, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, it was definitely not 19 and I'm almost 100% sure he was 18. Very small possibility that he was 17 but I believe Winter of 1850 (which is late 1849) means he was 18, after his birthday of October. One source says he began in 1849 and the other says winter of 1850 which I believe in this instance means late 1849 to early 1850. Since winter doesn't officially begin until November at the earliest, I'd say he was 18 (his birthday was mid october). I'll keep looking for more confirmation --Banime (talk) 22:35, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "He focused on history, literature, law, politics, English, and French while studying at the University of Bonn. During his studies in Bonn he developed many of his liberal tendencies."
Suggestion: "He entered the University of Bonn and focused on English, French, literature, history, law, and politics, acquiring liberal tendencies in his years there."
Done. --Banime (talk) 22:23, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "His future father-in-law, Prince Albert, had also studied there."
This seems trivial. Unless he met Prince Albert here, I do not see why it should be here. If their common alma mater had made Frederick favourable in Albert's eye, then this information should be in the Marriage (or later life) sections and made pertinent there.
I believe it could have, but no source that I could find states this specifically so it would just be speculation. I removed it. --Banime (talk) 22:23, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Marriage and family

  • "As early as 1851, there were plans to marry Frederick"
Suggestion: "As early as 1851, plans were made by European royalty to marry Frederick"
Done. --Banime (talk) 23:23, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "King Leopold I of Belgium, uncle of both Queen Victoria and Prince Albert, had long treasured the idea of Baron Stockmar of a marriage alliance between Britain and Prussia."
Eliminate the "of ... of" -> "King Leopold I of Belgium, uncle of both Queen Victoria and Prince Albert, had long treasured Baron Stockmar's idea of a marriage alliance between Britain and Prussia."
Done. --Banime (talk) 23:23, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The betrothal of the young couple was announced in April 1856. The wedding was on January 25, 1858, in the Chapel of St. James's Palace, London."
Add an "and" to connect the two. "The betrothal of the young couple was announced in April 1856, and the wedding was on January 25, 1858, in the Chapel of St. James's Palace, London."
Done. --Banime (talk) 23:23, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Although the marriage was arranged, the couple loved each other."
Arranged marriages do not mean they are naturally loveless. This is POV-ish slant. The question that should be answered here is: had the couple met and love each other before the marriage or after? In other words, "The couple had already met before the betrothal and were in love before their marriage." or "Through the marriage, the couple grew to love each other."
Ok I tried to fix this. I made it more specific. I wanted to show that although the parents mainly arranged the marriage, they still took kindly to one another and loved each other during the marriage. I don't think that's POV really, as when parents arrange a marriage for people who usually don't meet or talk to each other very long its sort of a crap shoot if they'll like each other. In this instance they loved each other, despite the uncertainty of an arranged marriage. Hopefully I captured that better and its not pov. --Banime (talk) 23:23, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The issue is the "Although". "Although" means that the followup clause is contradictory ("despite") to the idea of the first clause, such as "Although he never wielded a gun, he killed the Tyrranosaur with his first shot, aiming and hitting it through its eye." (hence giving the idea that without any training, he unexpectantly hit what he aimed for). In this context, the article's text lead us to believe that "arranged marriages" will normally be loveless, which is a point of view. I understand you are trying to state that "despite their lack of contact before their marriage, they grew to love each other", but as it is, it is the "lack of contact" and not the "arranged marriage" that should be the cause of contradiction (hope I am clearly my point here). I think,
"Although the marriage was arranged primarily by the parents, the couple had already took kindly to each other before the betrothal and were in love during their marriage." can be simply rendered as
"The couple had already took kindly to each other before the betrothal and loved each other throughout their marriage." Jappalang (talk) 01:10, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Done. --Banime (talk) 12:41, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The couple had eight children during their marriage"
Sometimes when things are too explicit, they get weird... When I read this clause, the first thing that popped into my mind was: They had children before or after the marriage? Why not just drop "during their marriage"?
Done. --Banime (talk) 23:23, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "However, both Princes Sigismund and Waldemar died in childhood, Sigismund at age 2 and Waldemar at age 11."
This can be reduced to "However, Sigismund died at the age of 2 and Waldemar at age 11."
Done. --Banime (talk) 23:23, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "would prove"
Simpler, "proved"
Done. --Banime (talk) 23:23, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Crown Prince

  • "On January 2, 1861, Frederick William's father became King William I of Prussia, and Frederick William himself became Crown Prince at the age of twenty-nine. He had to remain Crown Prince until the long-delayed death of his father on March 9, 1888."
POV-ish slant in the second sentence. It seems to say that William should have died and let Frederick be king (same thing as issue in lead)....
Suggestion: "On January 2, 1861, Frederick became the Crown Prince at the age of twenty-nine when his father acceded to the Prussian throne as King William I."
Either drop his "tenure" as Crown Prince or be neutral, "He would be Crown Prince for twenty-seven years."
Done. --Banime (talk) 23:51, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "new era for which Frederick"
I think it should be "new era that Frederick".
Done. --Banime (talk) 23:51, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "But the new King was an obstinate old soldier, not likely to change his conservative ideas at the age of sixty-four."
Eliminate a few redundancy and rewording, "But the new King was an obstinate soldier and unlikely to change his conservative ideas at the age of sixty-four."
Done. --Banime (talk) 23:51, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Frederick very nearly became King in September 1862. When the Diet refused funds for his army reorganization, William threatened to abdicate."
How about "In September 1862, Frederick very nearly became King; William threatened to abdicate when the Diet refused to fund his plans for the army's reorganization."
Done. --Banime (talk) 23:51, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Again, should Bismarck not be named in full on his first mention?
    Done, but wouldn't being mentioned in the lead be his first mention? I'll repeat it again in case people forgot. Also Bismarck is one of those names that doesn't really need a first name I believe, since he is so well known. Regardless it is changed and included for more context and clarity. --Banime (talk) 23:51, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The arrival of Bismarck"
As spotted in an FAC, arrival where? In the court, in Prussia, in America?
Clarified. --Banime (talk) 23:51, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "for the rest of the reign."
Best be clear here, "for the rest of William's reign."
Done. --Banime (talk) 23:51, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "A united Germany was not to be achieved through liberal and peaceful means but through Bismarck's policy of blood and iron, despite Frederick's insistence on campaigning for bloodless "moral conquests" to unify Germany."
Wee bit too poetical, try "Frederick had insisted on bloodless "moral conquests"—liberal and peaceful means—to unify Germany; however, it was Bismarck's policy of blood and iron that united the country."
Done. --Banime (talk) 23:51, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Military commander

  • "between him"
If it is referring to Wrangel "between Wrangel". If it is Frederick "between himself".
Done, Wrangel. --Banime (talk) 23:57, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Afterwards, he was opposed to a war against Austria. Regardless, Crown Prince Frederick was given command of one of the three armies during the Austro-Prussian war with General Leonhard Graf von Blumenthal acting as his chief of staff."
Take an active voice. "Afterwards, although he opposed a war against Austria, he received command of one of three armies to fight the Austro-Prussian war with General Leonhard Graf von Blumenthal as his chief of staff."
Done. --Banime (talk) 23:57, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "After the Battle of Wörth, Frederick was seen and praised by a London journalist for visiting many of his wounded men"
Too many "praises" in the paragraph, here is a suggestion: "After the Battle of Wörth, Frederick was lauded by a London journalist who had witnessed the Crown Prince's many visits of the wounded men."
Done. --Banime (talk) 23:57, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "journalists that "I do not"
I do not think the "that" should be there... "journalists, "I do not"?
Done. --Banime (talk) 23:57, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • " "[t]he "
Braces are unnecessary here.
Done. --Banime (talk) 23:57, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Heir to the German Empire

  • "Bismarck, now German Chancellor, disliked Frederick, and distrusted his and his wife's liberalism."
Dislike the "his and his", how about "Bismarck, now German Chancellor, disliked Frederick and distrusted the liberal attitudes of the Crown Prince and Princess."?
Done. --Banime (talk) 16:31, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Frederick was often at odds with his father and Bismarck's policies and actions and sided with liberals often. Frederick opposed ..."
Suggestion: "Often at odds with his father and Bismarck's policies and actions, Frederick sided with the country's liberals. He opposed ..."
Done. --Banime (talk) 16:31, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "It was very improbable that William, then 73, would reign until 1888."
Why is this here? Who thought of it and why? Was something planned in event of William's death? How does this connect with Frederick's lack of responsble positions?
Removed. --Banime (talk) 16:31, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "due to his work"
Best to be clearer here (since a death is mentioned later, just after we talked of William's death earlier): "his" refers to Frederick the Crown Prince, or William the King? Would "his death" refer to Frederick or William since the next sentence starts "Frederick continued his"?
Frederick's, done. --Banime (talk) 16:31, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Who said the final sentence (a quote) in the sub-section?
    I believe this is from the author himself. I think it would be best just to paraphrase it and keep the citation after. Done. --Banime (talk) 16:31, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Illness and brief reign

  • "as someone who would finally be able to implement the liberal ideas that he espoused."
This could mean he had a predecessor who had espoused liberal ideas but was unable to (who the article never mentions). Change to "Frederick was viewed with hope by liberals and progressives; finally, the country would be governed along liberal lines of thought."
Done, except I changed it to: "Frederick was viewed with hope by liberals and progressives that the country would finally be governed along liberal lines of thought." Tell me if you think that's okay.--Banime (talk) 16:53, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "which was finally diagnosed"
"finally" can be dropped in light of the sentence's starting with "by that time".
Done. --Banime (talk) 16:53, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "difficulties occurred over the proposed treatment of the patient."
I think "arose" would be better than "occurred".
I removed "soon" as I believe it is redundant. Jappalang (talk) 01:10, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Done. --Banime (talk) 16:53, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait... if problems of the treatment was due to the clash between British and German physicians, then why is this illustrated with the dissension between Bergmann and Virchow?
    Removed this entire slant, I don't think the German/British doctor thing matters and I couldn't find sources. There were disagreements between different physicians, is all. --Banime (talk) 16:53, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "This operation is called a tracheotomy."
Drop the sentence, insert "—tracheotomy—" between "treatment" and "suggested" in the MacKenzie sentence.
Done. --Banime (talk) 16:53, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Why is Bergmann involved in the operation?
    I don't know the specifics of this and when I find out I'll add it to the article. He was the personal physician of Frederick III so maybe that's why. --Banime (talk) 16:53, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "This caused the Emperor to cough and bleed, so Bergmann placed his forefinger into the wound to enlarge it. The bleeding only subsided after two hours."
(Due to the "so") How does "enlarging a wound" help to stop bleeding, or was it to stop the coughing?
I don't think anyone can tell his motivation for doing so I removed that and simply stated what happened. If I find more I'll add it.--Banime (talk) 16:53, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "unable to cause many"
Try, "unable to effect many".
Done. --Banime (talk) 16:53, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "force Robert von Puttkammer to resign on June 8"
Resign as what?
Added. --Banime (talk) 16:53, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "However, despite all of his efforts,"
Drop the "However, ".
Done. --Banime (talk) 16:53, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "may have realized that Germany's path to liberalism was in danger when in May 1888 he said "I cannot die ... What would happen to Germany?""
Did Pakula state that, or was the reference only for Frederick's quote? In other words, who was so certain Frederick had prescience on Germany's fate?
Removed the potential POV. --Banime (talk) 16:53, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "After his death, British Prime Minister William Gladstone called Frederick III"
Watch the preceding clause... this sentence makes it seem that Gladstone died and talked to Frederick in the afterlife...
Done, added Frederick's. --Banime (talk) 16:53, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Best rearrange the sentences. Put the mausoleum bit before Gladstone's praise and rewrite the sentence concerning Gladstone, making it the last sentence of the section.
    Done. --Banime (talk) 16:53, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Legacy

  • "are founded in his"
"are founded on his", founded on ideas, founded in time or location, I believe.
Done. --Banime (talk) 16:58, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "However, his father lived over 90 years, reigned over Prussia for 27 years, and reigned over Germany for 17 years."
Confusing... "his father lived over 90 years, reigning over Prussia for 27 years and Germany for 17 years."
Done. --Banime (talk) 16:58, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "in order to"
"to" will do.
Done. --Banime (talk) 16:58, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Historians argue further ...", "Historians also state that ..."
Perhaps replace the second "Historians" with "They"?
Done. --Banime (talk) 16:58, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Frederick's children also continued to greatly affect Europe after his death. Although many of his children held various political positions, his most well known son is William II, who became emperor after Frederick III's death."
That gives the idea that royal children only had power due to their daddies... Suggestion: "Frederick's children held various political positions and greatly influenced Europe. William II, was Frederick's most well known son, becoming emperor after Frederick III's death."
Done. --Banime (talk) 16:58, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Images

  • Perhaps it is best to leave out Image:FriedIII.jpg. It is a portrait of him as Crown Prince but the Infobox image is much better. Except the uniform, there are no distinguising features between those two portrayals. Along that thought, I would say FreidIII.jpg is purely decorative despite its "free"-ness.
    Removed. --Banime (talk) 15:37, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Overall a sturdy article, but I found some points (daddy should have died earlier, militarism is opposed to liberalism) to be perculiar.

Thanks for the great review. I believe I have addressed all of your concerns, however I could not find how to fix the formatting issues yet but I am still looking. Finally, in the lead you may still not like the sentence about his father's reign "preventing" his sons and I'm still thinking of a way to make that so it's not pov but still shows what I'm trying to say. If you have any questions or additional comments please ask! --Banime (talk) 17:01, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I did some copyedits. If you had not done so, you might wish to alert the four WikiProjects listed on the article's talk page of this review to get additional attention. Jappalang (talk) 01:10, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I've already alerted Wikiproject Germany, and I just transcluded it to WP MilHist, and I'll be alerting WP Biography as well. --Banime (talk) 12:48, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well, the above are all struck. Perhaps, another pair of eyes to copyedit and spot anything I missed (or messed up) would be recommended. Good luck on the FA! Jappalang (talk) 14:00, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Peer_review/Frederick_III,_German_Emperor/archive1&oldid=249701677"