Talk:Belgian Resistance

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Good article Belgian Resistance has been listed as one of the Warfare good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Good topic star Belgian Resistance is part of the Belgium in World War II series, a good topic. This is identified as among the best series of articles produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so.
Article milestones
Date Process Result
July 1, 2013 Good article nominee Listed
February 25, 2014 Good topic candidate Promoted
Current status: Good article
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Belgium (Rated GA-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Belgium, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Belgium on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.
 
WikiProject Military history (Rated GA-Class)
MILHIST This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
GA This article has been rated as GA-Class on the quality assessment scale.

Misc[edit]

Why am I having such a hard time finding anything on this site about Belgium during World War II? Captain Jackson 21:28, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

There are several sites dedicated to the Belgian Resistance. Reenactors: http://groupeg.webs.com/weaponsequipment.htm Overview: http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/belgium_resistance.htm From the Belgian POV: http://users.telenet.be/mverburg/EN/ (mind the pop-ups!) Laburke (talk) 15:27, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

Facts needed[edit]

Hello, I've been doing some work on this article and it occurs to me that it is seriously short of verifiable facts, except for the couple I've been able to add. The terms "Many" and "would often" do not really help build up a concrete picture of Resistance in Belgium. If anyone could add some, that'd be great!Brigade Piron (talk) 13:33, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Herman Bodson[edit]

If no-one objects, I'm proposing that the content on Herman Bodson (a writer and resistance fighter whose article currently redirects straight to this article) be removed to a separate page, as per Vejvančický's suggestion. Does anyone object? --Brigade Piron (talk) 14:15, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Belgian Resistance/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Retrolord (talk · contribs) 10:03, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

More Belgium WW2 ones :P. I'm happy to review it RetroLord 10:03, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi Retro, thanks for doing this! --Brigade Piron (talk) 14:39, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

"Armée Secrète" What is this? It seems to start getting mentioned about halfway through the article. What is it? RetroLord 10:10, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

  • There's an article (Armée Secrète) on the subject which I have linked to.

" Within Belgium, resistance was fragmented between a large number of different organizations, divided by regional and political stance, which, aside from sabotage of military infrastructure in the country and assassinations of collaborators, also published underground newspapers, gathered intelligence and maintained various escape networks that helped Allied airmen trapped behind enemy lines" That is quite the sentence. Could you please split it in two parts? RetroLord 19:07, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

  • Sorry, bad habit of mine! I've introduced a false stop so it's half as long. ---Brigade Piron (talk) 08:11, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

Question, why doesn't the article mention the Brigade Piron? Is an article about the belgian resistance complete without mentioning them? Happy to hear if you disagree though. RetroLord 18:24, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

  • Hi Retro! No not at all! The Resistance is about the opposition to the Nazis inside occupied Belgium - the Brigade Piron should be covered in Free Belgian Forces which I hope also to work on in due course.--Brigade Piron (talk) 18:50, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
Ok,i'm pretty happy with this article as a whole, give me a chance to go over it again entirely and then i'll pass it. RetroLord 19:25, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
Rate Attribute Review Comment
1. Well-written:
1a. the prose is clear and concise, it respects copyright laws, and the spelling and grammar are correct.

"were responsible" Was responsible?

  • Done!


1b. it complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.
2. Verifiable with no original research:
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.

"However, the committee was rendered redundant by the liberation in September." Ref?

  • I would assume that this is fairly evident, though I can reference it. Since coordinating the resistance is only necessary when there is resistance, and there is only resistance when there is something so resist - after liberation there's not much point!
Ok, thats fine then.

"The danger of infiltration posed by German informants meant that some cells were extremely small and local, and although nation-wide groups did exist, they were split along political and ideological lines." Ref?

  • Done!

"King Leopold III, imprisoned in the palace in Laeken, became a focal point for passive resistance, despite having been condemned by the government-in-exile for his decision to surrender." Ref?

  • Done!

"Today the role of the resistance during the conflict is commemorated by memorials, plaques and road names across the country." Ref?

  • Done!
2b. all in-line citations are from reliable sources, including those for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines.
2c. it contains no original research.
3. Broad in its coverage:
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).

"(including two generals)" A bit of an uneccessary detail methinks

  • I don't know actually - generals are usually regarded as more prestigious prisoners! ---Brigade Piron (talk) 14:39, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

"members across occupied Europe and also in Belgium." Can you rewrite this so the sentence is focused purely on Belgium?

  • Done!


4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without bias, giving due weight to each.
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by images:
6a. images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content.
6b. images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
7. Overall assessment.