Talk:Anton Schmid/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: K.e.coffman (talk · contribs) 04:44, 27 October 2018 (UTC)

• I will be reviewing the article; will start tomorrow. --K.e.coffman (talk) 04:44, 27 October 2018 (UTC)

Initial comments

The article looks to be in a great shape. Some prose suggestions, along with questions / comments, to begin with. They are listed in the order they appear on the page:

• Opening sentence: "was an Austrian electrician who saved Jews during..." -- Suggest changing to "Austrian recruit in the German Wehrmacht who saved..." My rationale is that Schmid was saving Jews in his capacity as a soldier (and that's what also makes the story so unique). "Electrician" can be mentioned as: "A devout but apolitical Roman Catholic and an electrician by profession, Schmid..."

 Done

• "begging" --> suggest "pleading"

 Done

• He was executed for treason --> it does not appear to be clear what the charge was, at least as per Wette's The Wehrmacht: History, Myth, Reality, p. 287. You can simply say "He was executed..." here, as well as elsewhere.

 Done

• In the infobox: a. Criminal charge | Treason; b. Criminal penalty | Execution -- Suggesting removing these two parameters, as they make Schmid sound like a criminal. Suggest instead populating the "Cause of death" parameter with something like: "Convicted by a military court and executed"

 Done

• he was apprenticed --> he apprenticed

 Done

• with finding German soldiers --> with collecting German soldiers

 Done

• which denied his widow and daughter financial support to which they were entitled... --> which denied his widow and daughter financial support to which they would otherwise have been entitled...

 Done

• Manfred Wieninger --> {{illm|Manfred Wieninger|de|Manfred_Wieninger}}

 Done

• On Günther Rüdel, Wette says that he participated in one case of the People's Court, where he fought for an acquittal. (Wette's The Wehrmacht, p. 279)

 Done

• However, the Third Reich's treason convictions of Wehrmacht soldiers have not been annulled.[41] -- this is cited to a 2009 source. I believe that this has changed since (?)

--K.e.coffman (talk) 00:20, 30 October 2018 (UTC)

I looked and could not easily find a source stating this. If it were annulled, I expect it would have been announced in the English-language media. However, I could quite possibly have missed sometihng and would happily amend this if there is RS stating otherwise. Catrìona (talk) 00:47, 30 October 2018 (UTC)

Ah, I may have confused it with the rehabilitation of deserters, which took place in 2002: "One example: the late rehabilitation of Wehrmacht deserters by the German Bundestag in 2002, for which Wette is involved." Source. Also here: [1]. To be on the safe side, I would preface the statement with "As of 2009,...".

I will work on the rest next. --K.e.coffman (talk) 01:16, 30 October 2018 (UTC)

Looks good; however, I changed "Executed by Nazi authorities" to "military court", as Schmid was arrested and tried by the Wehrmacht, not by the civilian administration. The former phrase could suggest that. --K.e.coffman (talk) 04:12, 30 October 2018 (UTC)

Assessment against GA criteria

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail: