Talk:Rape during the Rwandan Genocide/GA1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: Dana boomer (talk · contribs) 18:10, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi! I'll take this article for review, and should have my full comments up by later today. Dana boomer (talk) 18:10, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose, no copyvios, spelling and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
    • The lead shouldn't include information that is not found in the body of the article. Currently, the Shattered Lives report is not even mentioned in the body, much less the information about how frequently cited it is.
    • Background, "instances such as rape, forced impregnation and forced abortion are all methods used in pursuit of genocide." - This feel like you started with one sentence and ended with another. "instances such as rape...abortion have been seen" would be OK, or "ethnic cleansing, and rape...abortion are all methods used in pursuit of genocide" would be OK, but the current structure is ungrammatical.
    • Background - obviously this isn't an article completely about the use of rape in warfare, so you don't want to get too in-depth. However, as I was reading this section, my main question was whether this form of warfare has become more common during the 20th/21st centuries, or whether it has been practiced with approximately the same commonality throughout history. Do any of your sources address this?
    • Rape as a weapon, "According to Amnesty International, the use of rape during times of war are not a by-product of conflicts, but are a pre-planned and deliberate military strategy." Does AI mean this about all occurrences of rape during war, or just certain instances?
    • Rape as a weapon, "He believes that the deliberate infection of women with HIV is evidenced from survivors testimony, and that this is confirmation that the act of infection is deliberate." The first and second clauses of this sentence are redundant.
    • Rape as a weapon, "and sexually mutilated them with sharp sticks or gun barrels." Sexual mutilation or sexual assault? If the first, this could be incorporated into the previous sentence. If the second, the term should be changed.
    • Estimates of victims, "Rape during wartime has become commonplace." - This is repetitive after what was talked about in the Background section. It is unnecessary to repeat it here.
    • Aftermath, can we get translations for "les enfants mauvais souvenir" and "enfants désirés", please?
    • War crimes trials, "The first woman charged for genocidal rape was Pauline Nyiramasuhuko." Some background on her, please! Who was she/what office did she hold that put her in a position to be in charge of the genocidal rape?
    • War crimes trials - I have no idea what the last paragraph is trying to say. This might be because it's one long sentence, but it needs to be reworked.
    • Trials - were any of the individual soldiers ever tried? The trials section talks about the trials of the higher-ups, the government officials and media, but nothing about the individuals who actually carried out the crimes. What about the officers of the troops who conducted the rapes? The "rape squads" of HIV-infected men?
    • Overall - You mention in the Rape as a weapon section that Hutu women who hid Tutsis were targeted. Is there any information on how many Hutu women this covered? What was the split between extremist (participating in the violence) Hutus and more moderate members, who either didn't participate or actively helped Tutsis? Is there any information on how many troops/civilians participated in the rapes, either in specific numbers or in percentages?
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
    • Ref #10 (Münkler 2004, p. ?.) Why the question mark?
    • Overall, the refs in the article are really, really good - I am seriously impressed by the quality, quantity and attention to detail.
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
    • See a few of my comments above in the prose section, which really relate more to coverage.
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
    • It looks like there was a bit of dust-up in February, but everything is good since. I'm actually amazed at stability of this article; I would have thought that it would be much more controversial/attract a lot more IP edits.
  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:
    A few questions, above, but overall a really solid article. A truly horrifying moment in history, but it's good to see it getting the attention it deserves here on WP. Dana boomer (talk) 21:15, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
@Dana boomer: I think I have covered most of the issues raised, dunno what happened with the ref with the question mark, so I removed the sentence. Estimates for those who participated in rapes are not anywhere that I have read. Darkness Shines (talk) 15:42, 6 May 2014 (UTC)
@Dana boomer: this one has been around for quite a long time, where is it at? Thanks, Peacemaker67 (send... over) 11:45, 4 July 2014 (UTC) (Milhist coord)
@Peacemaker67:She has not been online since 3 june. And while I hope she is OK, I think I need another reviewer to take over. Darkness Shines (talk) 17:39, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

Since Dana suddenly went inactive, I'll place this back in the queue for another reviewer to wrap up. Wizardman 19:26, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

Dana's done the heavy lifting here, so I'll finish up the review today. Regards, Peacemaker67 (send... over) 03:47, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
I've checked the responses to Dana's points, and believe it now meets the GA criteria. I've added the year of the genocide in the first sentence of the lead, as not all readers will know when it occurred. A couple of suggestions if you want to take it further; more information on prosecutions or impunity regarding these crimes (including the estimated number of perpetrators), and some non-Rwandan examples (such as Bosnia) in the Background and Rape as a weapon of genocide sections. A really good article with excellent referencing. Well done. Regards, Peacemaker67 (send... over) 04:59, 20 July 2014 (UTC)