- The following discussion is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was: promoted by Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:33, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
Helmut Damerius
edit... that Helmut Damerius was arrested by the Soviet secret police for suspicion of being involved with the Hitler Youth even though he was over thirty?
- ALT1:
... that Helmut Damerius spent 18 years of his life in a gulag and banished to Kazakhstan and was released on condition he never talk or write about it? - ALT2:
... that Helmut Damerius's secretly written memoir about his 18 years in a Siberian gulag and banished to Kazakhstan was published after his death? - Reviewed: Nachum Dov Brayer
- ALT1:
Created/expanded by Marrante (talk). Self nom at 01:37, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
Article is new enough, long enough, and well sourced (in German). First hook is good, but is not found in the article. It's also not clear how being over 30 exempts him from the allegation of recruiting Hitler Youth; perhaps you could add more explanation in the article? The second hook is even better; I would suggest this tweak:- ALT3: ... that Helmut Damerius spent 18 years of his life in a gulag and banishment to Kazakhstan, and was finally released on condition that he never talk or write about it? Yoninah (talk) 15:20, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
- Actually, that was a question that occurred to me too, but I think the issue was that such a large number of people arrested in connection with the case were 30 or older, that it highlighted the ludicrousness of it all, certainly in hindsight. However, your ALT3 sounds very good to me, so let's go with that one. I'll see about making the age issue more apparent in the article, however. Thanks for the review. Marrante (talk) 21:18, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
Close paraphrasing concerns. Example: "In 1948, he read a newspaper article about an East German delegation of women to the Soviet Union and that his ex-wife would be heading it. He sent her a telegram, asking for her help. Though he received a reply, he was unable to get permission to travel to East Germany" vs "In 1948, he read a newspaper account about a delegation of East German women, headed by Emmy Damerius, that was visiting the Soviet Union. Damerius sent Emmy a telegram asking for help. Although Emmy sent him a reply, Damerius was unable to get permission to go to East Germany". Nikkimaria (talk) 15:44, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
- I work hard at avoiding paraphrasing, but with this one passage, it was difficult. I tried to write this bit several times, but had only this one source and the information was very limited, restricting how I could re-work it, such as "he received a reply" but no indication of who sent it, so what can I write, but "he received a reply". In my view, the information in the passage was all significant, showing how difficult it was for him to escape his situation. I have now eliminated some of the information and re-worked other parts. I hope it is now acceptable. If not, please let me know. Marrante (talk) 21:57, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
-
- I appreciate your efforts, but that was an example only - there are other passages that are also problematic. Here's another example: "filthy, overcrowded cell, where he was advised to confess to being a Nazi agent trying to recruit for the Hitler Youth" vs "filthy, overcrowded group cell...he was told to confess to being a Nazi agent trying to recruit for Hitler Youth". Nikkimaria (talk) 00:55, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
- I have amended the passage in your new complaint and removed half the sentence because I can't figure out a way to restate it and have it still be good writing. Would you please make a list of your other problem areas so I can fix them? Thank you. Marrante (talk) 01:27, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
- Well, I think that Nikkimaria is playing a game in which you were supposed to look past the passages she quoted to find other problematic text in the same passage. Actually, the source said:
- After his arrest, Damerius was locked away in a filthy, overcrowded group cell -- so overcrowded that the men had to take turns sleeping on the piss pot. He was occasionally called to interrogations. There, among other inanities, he was told to confess to being a Nazi agent trying to recruit for Hitler Youth, the official Nazi youth organization. When his interrogator let loose "a flood of curses, abuses, and threats," Damerius was tempted to fight back, but he knew the interrogator would call in help. And then, Damerius later wrote, "I feared that they could kill the communist in me."
- The article said:
- He was held at Lubyanka Prison in an filthy, overcrowded cell, where he was advised to confess to being a Nazi agent trying to recruit for the Hitler Youth. The interrogator's abuse made him want to fight back, but he didn't because he knew the interrogator would simply get help and he was afraid "that they could kill the communist in me", as he later wrote.
- The two passages actually look very different (because the article omits the most colorful parts of the source), but I imagine that Nikkimaria is suggesting potential copyvio in the strings "filthy, overcrowded cell", "confess to being a Nazi agent trying to recruit for the Hitler Youth," and "fight back, but he didn't because he knew the interrogator would simply get help." I reject the theory that the source's "filthy overcrowded", as applied to a prison cell, is wording potentially subject to copyright. If anything, it's a cliche. (Search Google for "filthy overcrowded", in quotation marks, and you'll see what I mean.)
- Marrante's latest edit to the article indicated that other prisoners had advised him to confess, but my reading of the source indicates that in fact it was the interrogators who told him to confess. I edited the article to reflect that, and I made additional edits to the discussion of his reactions to the interrogator's abuse (the third string). The duplication detector software probably would like to treat "he later wrote" as a copyvio, but since the source isn't explicit about when or where he wrote that (I merely infer that it was in the memoir "Unter falscher Andschuldigung"), almost any rewording of that phrase (which generates 14 million ghits) could be original research.
- I haven't found anything else potentially problematic. --Orlady (talk) 03:12, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
- I think Nikkimaria isn't playing a game at all, but simply didn't want to list every single instance of close paraphrasing. Nor have I suggested a copyright violation, but simply a close paraphrasing issue - though both are problematic, the former is much more so, and thankfully that isn't the issue here. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:35, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
- Orlady, thanks for your help with this. I saw your change regarding the advice given to confess. I think it was actually the prisoners, but in trying to change the passage to avoid the paraphrasing, I added the source of the advice without checking the ref again and after seeing your change there, realized I had that information from my reading about Gustav Sobottka, Jr., who was also arrested in that case. With him, I had more than one source saying that prisoners had advised confession – as the only means of ending the torture. (Sobottka had the "benefit" of having been interviewed about the torture by the NKVD, who, at that point, were nailing their own regarding mishandling of investigations.) So, back to the problem at hand. Are there other passages that are problematic? And, if so, what are they so I can fix them? Nikkimaria, if you won't identify them and Orlady thinks the article is okay, this nom can be returned to the queue. Marrante (talk) 07:40, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
- I think Nikkimaria isn't playing a game at all, but simply didn't want to list every single instance of close paraphrasing. Nor have I suggested a copyright violation, but simply a close paraphrasing issue - though both are problematic, the former is much more so, and thankfully that isn't the issue here. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:35, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
Marking as ready for re-review (by somebody other than me). --Orlady (talk) 17:18, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
