191:" or a summary style section concerning that subject. The "Historical evidence" stub-section should either be significantly expanded or omitted (its not exactly the equal of "Legacy" or "Biography"). It is the weakest part of the article in that it says there is a lot to say about her, but then the doesn't say anything. Either tell the reader what there is to say (how this evidence was interpreted, how she her image has changed, interpretations, controversies, theories) or don't bring it up. --
220:). An encyclopedia is fact-checked and stable, wikipedia is rarely fact-checked and not stable. Knowledge needs as many (easily-checked) references as possible to become a legitimite source of info. However, many of the claims listed above can just be re-worded so that it is not citing the opinion of someone else. Its really all about appearences. Make the reader believe what the article is saying is correct and intelligent. For a good example of using references and footnotes see
203:
section. Most of your suggestions regarding it are addressed elsewhere in the article. The point of the section is to demonstrate that (unlike other national leaders such as
William Wallace), abundant historical evidence does survive regarding Joan of Arc. Some of the uncited statements are hard to reference appropriately. Must an encyclopedia attribute an opinion when dozens (perhaps hundreds) of scholars have published the same view? Thank you very much for the feedback.
98:
The structure is decent. However, I recommend re-naming "Context" to something more standard like "Background" or someting more specific like "Royal
Succession". If "Biography" is going to be used with sub-headings dividing the timeline then give us a little intro, like how the intro to the article
202:
Some of the editorial choices have been dictated by space constraints. Had added a
Wikilink regarding the artistic references. Changing to a footnote. Will add another Wikilink to the bibliography at the footnote section per your suggestion. Thinking of ways to improve the historical evidence
186:
but didn't pay any attention to it since I was focused on this article (don't want the reader getting distracted by another article before finishing the main one). Perhaps put a footnote from "Major writers and composers who created works..." that says "see
108:
I would like to see a "Suggested
Readings" or "Further Readings" section since she has been written about so much. This section could state the most authoritative, or best, or most recent books/studies. Also, studies about different aspects of her
115:"Major writers and composers who created works about her include Shakespeare, Voltaire, Schiller, Verdi, Tchaikovski, Twain, Shaw, and Brecht. Depictions of her continue in film, television, and song." (many references needed)
71:
To be candid, the editors remain less than harmonious. We are in the latter stages of moderation. There have been sock puppets and one editor has resorted to variable AOL IP addresses. Page protection may become necessary.
30:
This article was the subject of a previous peer review in March of this year. Since then it has undergone major changes. I joined
Knowledge earlier this fall and used the peer review feedback.
56:
Syntax, accuracy, and internal links have received attention. This has resulted in improvements to several linked articles. For instance, a feature length biography of
99:
summarizes the article - but less specific and more theme-based (ie. unifying factors of her life, differences from normal 15th C. girls, life-long values, etc.).
53:
Several images have been added from the French and German
Knowledge. Placement on the page is relevant to the text and includes informative captions.
224:(a very controversial subject with easily verified notes). I'd expect even more from the most studied "figure of the European middle ages." --
67:. That material has grown substantially, mostly with translations I made from the French Knowledge regarding operas, painting, and sculpture.
50:
Previously the Joan of Arc article had no citations or bibliography. It now has 18 footnotes and a selected bibliography with ISBN numbers.
75:
Pending stabilization, we hope this is something
Knowledge can present on the main page. We invite feedback from other Wikipedians.
21:
105:
The article says there are surviving documents with her signature. Her signature would make a great image for the article.
102:
The "Historical evidence" section is pretty weak considering she is the most studied "figure of the
European middle ages."
85:
I apologize for the previous peer review that posted automatically. It did not seem appropriate for me to delete it.
171:
154:
217:
161:. These are the first two entries within the internal links section. Perhaps that isn't prominent enough?
17:
228:
207:
195:
165:
148:
89:
79:
112:
I expected a lot more references. Here is a brief list of what should have some kind of reference:
188:
183:
158:
64:
212:
One difference between an encyclopedia article and a
Knowledge article is the references (per
133:"Her response was not only perfect but poetic." (whose opinion is this? cite at least one.)
31:
47:
Context and Legacy sections summarize the political background and her historical impact.
225:
221:
213:
192:
174:
link. Might be best to create a reference section (with all the sources used to create
145:
57:
60:
translated from the French
Knowledge now takes the place of a former two line stub.
204:
162:
86:
76:
95:
This is well on its way to becoming a FA. Here are some comments to consider:
118:"The extent of her military leadership is a subject of historical debate."
44:
The entire article has been rewritten for NPOV and narrative flow.
178:
article) or a "References and notes" section and put that as a
153:
Most of your comments are addressed in two branch articles:
41:
The introduction has been expanded per previous feedback.
34:
and I hope this has achieved featured article standards.
127:"Most historians blame French grand chamberlain..."
180:For further reading see Joan of Arc bibliography.
63:The Joan of Arc lists now form their own page at
8:
130:"Many historians condemn Charles VII..."
124:"Recent scholarship that focuses ..."
7:
121:"Traditional analysis cites her..."
28:
1:
229:06:52, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
208:22:00, 10 December 2005 (UTC)
196:19:54, 10 December 2005 (UTC)
90:03:48, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
80:21:53, 25 November 2005 (UTC)
166:17:48, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
149:19:34, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
253:
172:Joan of Arc bibliography
155:Joan of Arc bibliography
218:Knowledge:Verifiability
18:Knowledge:Peer review
189:Joan of Arc in art
184:Joan of Arc in art
182:I saw the link to
159:Joan of Arc in art
65:Joan of Arc in art
222:Hugo Chávez#Notes
170:I didn't see the
244:
252:
251:
247:
246:
245:
243:
242:
241:
32:User:Switisweti
26:
25:
24:
12:
11:
5:
250:
248:
240:
239:
238:
237:
236:
235:
234:
233:
232:
231:
199:
198:
139:
138:
137:
136:
135:
134:
131:
128:
125:
122:
119:
116:
110:
106:
103:
100:
83:
69:
68:
61:
58:Pierre Cauchon
54:
51:
48:
45:
42:
37:To summarize:
27:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
249:
230:
227:
223:
219:
215:
211:
210:
209:
206:
201:
200:
197:
194:
190:
185:
181:
177:
173:
169:
168:
167:
164:
160:
156:
152:
151:
150:
147:
143:
142:
141:
140:
132:
129:
126:
123:
120:
117:
114:
113:
111:
107:
104:
101:
97:
96:
94:
93:
92:
91:
88:
82:
81:
78:
73:
66:
62:
59:
55:
52:
49:
46:
43:
40:
39:
38:
35:
33:
23:
19:
179:
175:
84:
74:
70:
36:
29:
22:Joan of Arc
226:maclean25
193:maclean25
146:maclean25
20: |
214:WP:CITE
205:Durova
163:Durova
87:Durova
77:Durova
109:life.
16:<
216:and
176:this
157:and
144:--
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.