Talk:The Holocaust in Lithuania/GA2

GA Review

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

I'll be happy to review this article for GAC. H1nkles (talk) 17:21, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

GA Review Philosophy

When I do an article review I like to provide a Heading-by-Heading breakdown of suggestions for how to make the article better. It is done in good faith as a means to improve the article. It does not necessarily mean that the article is not GA quality, or that the issues listed are keeping it from GA approval. I also undertake minor grammatical and prose edits. After I finish this part of the review I will look at the over arching quality of the article in light of the GA criteria and make my determination as to the overall quality of the article.

GA Checklist

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it well written?

   A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:

   B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:

2. Is it verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check?

   A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:

   B. Reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose):

   C. It contains no original research:

   D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:

   Still could be more comprehensive but I feel it touches the subject enough to pass GA criteria

   B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):

4. Is it neutral?

   It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:

5. Is it stable?

   It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:

6. Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?

   A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:

   B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

Regarding Lead

• "The Holocaust of Lithuanian Jewry can be considered the worst tragedy in the history of Lithuania - never before or since in Lithuania have so many people died in so short a time." Watch Weasel words here. Also this is a stub paragraph, consider expanding or combining. H1nkles (talk) 17:29, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

partially done.Fainites ^barleyscribs 20:14, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Note the new lead image (map).--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 06:11, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Regarding background

• "Prior to the German invasion of the Soviet Union on 22 June 1941, some people in Lithuania believed Germany would grant the country independence and in order to appease the Germans expressed significant anti-semitic sentiments." Runon sentence, break up into multiple sentences.

Done.Fainites ^barleyscribs 20:17, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

• You'll need to cite the end of this section. I added a to this so it's easy to see what facts need citation.

• Slightly expanded and referenced.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 06:08, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

• I think this section could be more comprehensive. How long have Jews been in Lithuania? Where were they concentrated? Had there been anti-semitic feelings prior to Nazi occupation? I think you could expand this section a bit. H1nkles (talk) 17:34, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

• Added a template and link to History of the Jews in Lithuania where interested editors can find out many more details on this subject.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 06:10, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Regarding Destruction of Lithuanian Jewry

• Good attempt to detail how many Jews were in Lithuania prior to Nazi occupation and how many were killed.
• " A rogue unit of insurgents headed by Algirdas Klimaitis and encouraged by Germans from the Sicherheitspolizei and Sicherheitsdienst, started anti-Jewish pogroms in Kaunas (Kovno) on the night of 25 June-26 June 1941 in which over a thousand Jews perished over the next few days in what was the first pogrom in Nazi-occupied Lithuania." This is a run-on sentence please break up.

Done.Fainites ^barleyscribs 20:23, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

• This sentence is fairly awkward, "Additional factors were religion (Orthodox Catholic), severe economic problems (leading to killing of Jews over personal property) and opposed political orientations (support of the Soviet regime in Lithuania during 1940-1941 by Lithuanian Jews)[d]." Consider expanding this section by giving specific rationale for each factor. H1nkles (talk) 18:17, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

partially done. Fainites ^barleyscribs 20:32, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Regarding Comprehension and rememberance

• this sentence, "Early in the war, some Lithuanian Jewish survivors fell victim to pogroms, some orchestrated by the Lithuanian nationalists." seems redundant, I could be wrong though.

Done.Fainites ^barleyscribs 20:36, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

• I added two more to the end of two paragraphs in this section. Please reference.

Referenced first, removed second (block of text) - see my comment at #Jewish partisans in modern Lithuania below.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 06:19, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

• Have there been any memorials erected to commemorate the holocaust in Lithuania? H1nkles (talk) 18:39, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

• I'd hope that our Lithuanian editors could answer that, if they are following this thread? I have not run into any mentions of that in English sources I read.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 05:54, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Regarding Notes

Interesting section, I've never seen an article with such extensive notations like this. H1nkles (talk) 18:39, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Regarding References

• Reference 22 is dead please fix.

Done.Fainites ^barleyscribs 21:24, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

• Reference 17 has a large description after it in Lithuanian, why? In an English dictionary this won't be of use.

• As I don't know Lithuanian, I can only ask our Lithuanian editors to explain it (and preferably, translate). Otherwise, I'd support removal what is for 99,9% of the readers an incomprehensible (and thus indeed useless) block of text.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 06:21, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

• Otherwise the references are good, formatted well and credible.

Regarding overall review

• Could a see also section be added? I think there are several related articles that would be good to put here.

• It is my understanding see also is bad style. Since we have the entire Holocaust template in the article anyway, I am not sure what else could we add to see also that's relevant and not linked somewhere in the article? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 05:53, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

• Some prose issues - run on sentences for example - need to be addressed.
• Photos look good.
• check that dead link.

• What dead link? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 06:22, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

I already fixed it. It was to "Righteous Among Nations".Fainites ^barleyscribs 13:02, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

• There is an issue of comprehensiveness. I think more could be added, especially in the background section.
• I'll put the article on hold for a week and give some time to make corrections. Please let me know if you finish early and I'll finish my review. H1nkles (talk) 18:47, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Final comments

• The fixes have been made and I will pass the article. Well done.
• Regarding the naming controversy, I will post my opinions in the discussion thread on the article's talk page. Keep up the good work on this very important topic. H1nkles (talk) 16:52, 23 February 2009 (UTC)