The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by Ealdgyth via FACBot (talk) 22 May 2020 [1].

---

Harriet Leveson-Gower, Countess Granville[edit]

Nominator(s): Ruby2010 (talk) 03:28, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I came across the subject of Lady Granville about six years ago, when reading about her very famous mother. I subsequently created her article and brought it to GA status in October 2014, but then forgot about it until last year, when I came across her again in a book about diplomatic wives. I've since almost entirely rewritten the article and have brought it here to you now. I hope you find her as interesting as I have! Ruby2010 (talk) 03:28, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from JM[edit]

• "After a difficult labour,[59] their eldest child Susan was born within a year of the wedding." This is a difficult sentence, because it has two temporal adverbial clauses. Perhaps you could split this into two short sentences?
• "With dread, she predicted the long hours and superficiality of social life in France." This sentence doesn't quite work for me. Can it be revisited?
• "Harriet's many letters "gives us remarkable" Singular/plural issue.

That's it - that's all I can see! A really good read. Please double-check my edits. (I'm taking part in the WikiCup.) Josh Milburn (talk) 22:10, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Josh, thanks very much for taking a look! I made a few edits that hopefully resolve your points. For the final item, I found I slightly misquoted the author's grammar, so thank you for observing something was amiss. If you notice anything else, please post. Ruby2010 (talk) 18:48, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Happy to stick my neck out on this one. It's very well-written, and a close look at the sources (no spotchecks) suggests that they are all suitably reliable and well-formatted, while some Google Scholar searching suggests that nothing major has been missed. I'm watching this page in case I've missed anything, though. Josh Milburn (talk) 09:31, 21 March 2020 (UTC)Forgot to mention: I'm taking part in the WikiCup. Josh Milburn (talk) 07:35, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Ruby2010 (talk) 18:04, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Image review—pass[edit]

All images are free. Despite the lack of freedom of panorama in France, the chateau is old enough to render that question moot. buidhe 03:30, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your review, Buidhe! Ruby2010 (talk) 18:49, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support from Gog the Mild[edit]

Nb It is my intention to claim points in the WikiCup for this review.

• It seems odd, in that it jumps chronologically, that her parents are mentioned in the lead after her childhood.

• Yes, I was finding it difficult to organize the opening paragraph. Hopefully this is better? Ruby2010 (talk) 00:27, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• "Devonshire House had become the centre of fashionable life in the Georgian era." Just checking that the consensus od sources supports "the", rather than 'a'?

• Yes, "the" is supported by the sources. This claim is mostly cited to Surtees, who writes that "Harriet Cavendish was born in 1785 into a society of all that was brilliant, political, cultivated and good-mannered in the world of fashion, of which Devonshire House was the centre". Askwith mentions that at Harriet's birth, Devonshire House was the "epicentre of the aristocratic circle of the time". Ruby2010 (talk) 00:27, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• "and ensured they had a stable upbringing with a good education." Your earlier statements would seem to indicate that Harriet did not have "a stable upbringing". Perhaps "ensured they had" → 'strove to provide' or similar?

• Yes, good point. Now edited to "strove to provide". Ruby2010 (talk) 00:27, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• "As she continued to remain single over the next several years" Maybe 'As she remained single over the next several years'?

• Yes, I think this tightens the phrasing up nicely. Now edited. Ruby2010 (talk) 00:27, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• "and thus usurped this role from his eldest unmarried daughter" I think eldest is redundant.

• "Eldest" is significant only because decent society would have dictated that someone in this position take on certain family duties. But since this does not strictly add much to the reader's understanding, I have removed it. Ruby2010 (talk) 00:27, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• "equivalent to £730,951 in 2019" Seems spuriously accurate. Can I suggest adding 'r=−4'? "£2,192,852" likewise.

• I'm a tad unfamiliar with this template, but when I tried updating to r=4, it added more digits (becoming £730,950.764 and £2,192,852.292, respectively). I think keeping it at the default of r=0 is better, since the values are fewer, but I am open to suggestions. Ruby2010 (talk) 00:27, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have implemented what I was suggesting - it needs the minus sign. If you don't like it, revert.

• Looks good, thank you. Ruby2010 (talk) 19:47, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• "Social hostess": in the first paragraph we are told a little about each of the children other than Susan. Could a similar summary be added for her?

• Yes, I added that she was the wife of the 4th Baron Rivers (compared to her siblings there is not much else to write, I'm afraid). Ruby2010 (talk) 00:27, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

More to follow. Gog the Mild (talk) 17:54, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• "the cabinets of several ministries" Ministries don't have cabinets, governments do.

• You are correct, now edited. Ruby2010 (talk) 00:27, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• The 28 years from 1796–1824 seem to only be covered by "Beginning in 1796 he was stationed in foreign courts, firstly in France and then in Prussia and Russia". I am not sure that this meets 1b comprehensive: it neglects no major facts or details and places the subject in context.

• I found it a bit difficult to outline Granville's timeline. This paragraph was intended to provide an overview of his political and diplomatic career. I'll work on this and post back when it's worth another look. Ruby2010 (talk) 00:27, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Ok, I've finished making some edits. I ended up trimming some of his background and then moving it up to earlier in the article; this helped resolve any perceived gaps in his timeline. The reader is first introduced to him in the Marriage section where they learn a bit about his background, and then proceeds to follow his life as it impacts his wife (the subject of this article). Please let know if you have any remaining concerns here. Ruby2010 (talk) 03:28, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• "She dreaded the long hours and superficiality of social life in France." Optional: → 'She dreaded the long hours and the superficiality of social life in France.

• I like it; now added. Ruby2010 (talk) 00:27, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Note 2: "A daughter of the famous moral children's writer" Is there actually such a thing as a "moral children's writer"? It suggests to me that the person referred to is both moral and a writer, which I suspect is not what is intended. Possibly 'A daughter of the famous writer of moral children's stories' or similar?

• This edit hopefully clarifies this a bit. Ruby2010 (talk) 00:27, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• "often depended on social capital." It may just be me, but I have no idea what that means. Could "social capital" be linked, or explained, or reworded; or all of these?

• Yes, I linked to Social capital. Basically it means that relationships were important in the pursuit of diplomacy, particularly in that era – those who had connections and influence were more effective at achieving their goals. Ruby2010 (talk) 00:27, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• "managing les elegantes" This is the English Wikipedia. Do we need an unlinked and unexplained foreign word. No doubt a reader could Google it, but that would seem to defeat the point of an encyclopedia. Could we have a bracketed translation after the phrase?

• The phrase appears many times in her letters, so I thought it a shame to lose it. :) But since I agree the reader's understanding is of paramount importance, I reworked the sentence and omitted it. Ruby2010 (talk) 00:27, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

In which case feel free to retain it, but explain it in line. Eg, to pick random examples, "he was elected praetor (commander) of a Roman field army" [explanation in brackets] or "In succession he was appointed: quaestor, a junior position administering the public treasury; plebeian tribune, a senior position with – in theory – extensive powers over the legislature; and praetor, a senior administrative and judicial position reporting directly to the emperor." [explanations in the text].

• Thanks – I'll put some thought into restoring the phrase, if I can find a succinct way to explain it. Ruby2010 (talk) 19:47, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• "Harriet viewed her role more so as a facilitator" Is "so" necessary?

• I suppose not! Now removed. Ruby2010 (talk) 00:27, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• "Due to changes in government ministries, the Leveson-Gowers spent approximately seventeen years in Paris" I don't see why the latter follows from the former - "Due to". Could the reason or mechanism be explained?

• Sorry, I can clarify this further in the article. Granville's posting would have depended on those in power at the time; when a government changed, diplomats were often pulled back to England. I'll work on adding a bit more context here. Ruby2010 (talk) 00:27, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• I made some edits that hopefully help; please review the paragraph again and let me know if you have additional concerns. Ruby2010 (talk) 03:28, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• "her behaviour as one of a typical Victorian era widow" I don't think that behaviour is singular, at least in this case. "one" → 'that'. You are right, now edited. Ruby2010 (talk) 00:27, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• "the time period in which she lived" "time is redundant.

• Yes, now edited. Ruby2010 (talk) 00:27, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Impressive work. A flowing yet lively read. Gog the Mild (talk) 23:53, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Gog the Mild, thanks very much for your review. I made most of your requested edits, with just a few remaining actionable items on my end. I will post here again when complete. Thanks again, Ruby2010 (talk) 00:27, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I have finished making some additional edits. Please let me know if you have any remaining items. Thanks again, Ruby2010 (talk) 03:28, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Very well tweaked. A lovely article. Happy to support. Note a couple of comments from me above. Gog the Mild (talk) 11:33, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much! Ruby2010 (talk) 19:47, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Dudley[edit]

• "Lady Henrietta Elizabeth Cavendish was born on 29 August 1785 at Devonshire House, Piccadilly, London. Her parents were William Cavendish, 5th Duke of Devonshire, and his first wife, Lady Georgiana Spencer.[1][2] As such, she was born into enormous privilege. As major landowners, the Spencer family controlled one of the largest fortunes in England. The Duke of Devonshire possessed even more wealth, with an annual income that was twice as much as that of Georgiana's father; in addition to Devonshire House, he owned Chatsworth House and four other estates of similar opulence. 1. You start two successive sentences with "As", and neither seems necessary. I would suggest deleting "As such, she was born into enormous privilege." as superfluous and starting the next "The Spencer family were major landowners who..." 2. Why is the Spencer wealth relevant? Did Lady Georgiana inherit it or did she bring a vast dowry?

• I've removed the "enormous privilege" sentence but kept the structure of the following sentence intact. Yes, Georgiana brought a large dowry into the marriage. I wanted to make it clear that both sides of Harriet's family were wealthy without getting too detailed. If needed, there is more I can add here to help clarify this. Ruby2010 (talk) 23:59, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• "Seeking distraction from an unhappy match, the Duchess spent her time socialising and gambling, and became a popular political hostess and leader of fashion. By the time of Harriet's birth, Devonshire House had become the centre of fashionable life in the Georgian era." I think this is a bit misleading. The first sentence is OK, but by the time of Harriet's birth, her mother had lost her popularity due to her conduct supporting the Whigs in the 1784 election. According to the ODNB articles (which you cite, apart from the one on her father) Devonshire's wife and mistress lived happily together in a menage-a-trois. Devonshire and his wife were both Whig supporters, and Devonshire House was primarily a Whig social centre.

• This claim is mostly cited to Surtees, who writes that "Harriet Cavendish was born in 1785 into a society of all that was brilliant, political, cultivated and good-mannered in the world of fashion, of which Devonshire House was the centre". Askwith mentions that at Harriet's birth, Devonshire House was the "epicentre of the aristocratic circle of the time". Both sources mention 1785 but are hardly specific in saying whether at that precise moment Devonshire House (and Georgiana) were popular. I dug into another source (Foreman 1998) a bit more and found that her popularity had at least been restored by 1786. So I've changed this to be a bit vaguer: "By the mid-1780s, Devonshire House had...". Let me know if you have additional concerns. Ruby2010 (talk) 23:59, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• "her lover Charles Grey" Perhaps "the future prime minister, Charles Grey".

• Updated. Ruby2010 (talk) 23:59, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• "But after three years of indecisiveness, Duncannon married another." I would prefer "another woman", although this is probably personal taste.

• Updated. Ruby2010 (talk) 23:59, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• "their refusals, often in response to his womanising reputation". "in response to" sounds wrong to me. How about "due to"?

• Updated. Ruby2010 (talk) 23:59, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Granville "served briefly in the cabinets of several governments". I doubt whether this is correct. ODNB only mentions July to October 1809.

• This perhaps came down to my misunderstanding of his appointment as a "lord of the Treasury". Reworked the sentence to specify he briefly served in the Second Portland ministry. Ruby2010 (talk) 23:59, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• "she did so out of support for her husband". I would say "she did so to support for her husband"

• Updated ("did so to support her husband"). Ruby2010 (talk) 23:59, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• "Harriet initially cared little for politics, perhaps because she had been inundated with the topic from a young age." If you were writing about her sister, you could say that she was passionately interested in politics because she had been inundated from a young age. I would delete as nonsensical.

• Sorry, I'm not sure I understand this point. The intent is to surprise the reader that while her mother was very public and active in politics, Harriet cared little for the subject. Perhaps this is not coming across enough? Ruby2010 (talk) 23:59, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• It is the comment attributing her lack of interest to her mother's interest that I was questioning. If she had come from an apolitical family and you had written "Harriet initially cared little for politics, perhaps because her family had no interest in the subject", that would make more sense. I suggest something along the lines of "Unlike her mother and sister, Harriet cared little for politics until late in life." Dudley Miles (talk) 14:56, 7 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Ah, I see. Hopefully now it is improved. I changed to "Despite being inundated with politics from a young age, Harriet cared little for the subject until later in life." Ruby2010 (talk) 03:17, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• "Granville's family were firm Tories, though he was more moderate in his positions." Flexible might be a better word than moderate. According to ODNB, his marriage brought him into the Whig ambit.

• Updated. Ruby2010 (talk) 23:59, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• This is a good article, but I think it is a bit weak on the early family and political background. Dudley Miles (talk) 18:51, 4 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Dudley, thanks very much for your review and careful eye. If you have any further concerns or questions, please let me know. Ruby2010 (talk) 23:59, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• One reply above, but I still think the article is thin on the early background, especially as it is not a long article. A few points (if I remember the ODNB articles correctly from a quick read): Her mother's heavy drinking was also a major problem. Georgiana and Bess were close friends and may have been lovers. Georgiana accepted the menage a trois. Bess helped to bring Georgiana's gambling and drinking under control, and thus to successfully bear her daughters, but also tried to set the Duke against her. Bess accompanied Georgiana when she was exiled to bear her illegitimate child. Georgiana was a major figure in Whig politics and Devonshire House was an opposition social centre. The Duke supported the Whigs financially though out of what he regarded as hereditary loyalty to the party rather than a strong interest in politics. Georgiana was vilified for canvassing lower class voters in the 1784 election and the acrimony against her for dividing society along party lines in the Regency crisis of 1789-90 was so great that she and the Duke and Bess fled to France. Of course, you will decide what if any of these points you think are relevant to her daughter. Dudley Miles (talk) 14:56, 7 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• My apologies for the delayed reply. Yes, I struggled with how much detail to provide on Harriet's family – it was fascinating to read about, in part due to the many items you listed! I do have plans to work on their articles more in the future, but for Harriet, I ended up only including detail when it directly impacted her or provided needed context. That said, of the details you listed, I do think the article would be most improved by clarifying Bess's role in the Devonshire marriage (and indeed Harriet's own conception). Right now this is mainly addressed in the 'Upbringing and first London season' section, including with a footnote. I will work on adding a bit more detail earlier in the article, so that the reader is not misled to think Bess only appeared later in Harriet's life. Ruby2010 (talk) 03:11, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• I've reworked the Elizabeth Foster content; please let me know if you have any further comments, Dudley Miles. Ruby2010 (talk) 02:08, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Further comments
• You repeat yourself saying twice that Elizabeth Cavendish became a member of the household.
• "Despite being inundated with politics from a young age". You say this as if you have already mentioned it, although you have not. It seems as relevant to her early life as her mother's devotion to fashion and gambling and I think it should be covered.
• I would give the year of birth when you list her children. Dudley Miles (talk) 13:32, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Good feedback – I have made the requested changes, Dudley Miles. Ruby2010 (talk) 21:18, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support. Looks fine now. Dudley Miles (talk) 21:31, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Thank you! Ruby2010 (talk) 21:42, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Coord note[edit]

• Source review? And @Dudley Miles: for an update on their concerns? --Ealdgyth (talk) 23:43, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• I am waiting for Ruby2010 to add further detail as in her reply above. Dudley Miles (talk) 08:16, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Hi, sorry for the delay – my job has been keeping me busy. I'm hoping to have some time to work on this during this week, and will post here again when done. A source review can proceed, if any editor comes across this and has some time. Ruby2010 (talk) 03:21, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• I've added a reply above. Thanks for your patience. Ruby2010 (talk) 02:08, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Source review - spotchecks not done

• Is there a reason Granville William is not listed in the infobox?
• FNs 129 and 131 are missing page numbers. Nikkimaria (talk) 17:14, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the review. I've added the missing son to the inbox; he died young so that is why I had omitted him.

As for the footnotes, I didn't feel that FN 129 needed a page number since the whole source is backing up the claim (Surtees 1990 is supporting that Surtees produced an edited collection in 1990); if this is considered too much use of a primary source, I also included another (Hayter 1990) to be safe. For FN 131, there were no page numbers on the ancestry pages contained in the source, but I have done a bit of guesswork and added what I think would be the page numbers if they were present. Ruby2010 (talk) 02:03, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

SG comments[edit]

• After her brother's death in 1858, she inherited Chiswick House and subsequently took up residence. Subsequently adds nothing.
• What is the number range style used in the article? Either 255–6 or 164–65. Sample only, more throughout.
  • Surtees 1990, pp. 255–56.
  • Askwith 1982, pp. 164–5.
• I believe there is a MOS:COLLAPSE problem in the Ancestry section (but I have not followed MOS closely lately).

That is all the checking I did ... SandyGeorgia (Talk) 13:32, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your review, SandyGeorgia! I've removed "subsequently" and gone through to update the page numbers (using the standard "pp=176–77"). I don't see an issue with the Ancestry section; could you clarify further? Is the issue that it should not be collapsed at all? (Sorry if a silly question). Ruby2010 (talk) 02:45, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Collapsed text used to be discouraged ... unsure if it still is, but I suspect so ... SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:52, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oh. Ancestry sections are collapsed in most articles where they are present; it seems this is the default with the template. Others can weigh in though if they think it should be collapsed or not. Ruby2010 (talk) 16:47, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FAC/ar, and leave the ((featured article candidates)) template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.