Talk:Theresienstadt Ghetto and the Red Cross/GA1
Appearance
GA Review
[edit]GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: K.e.coffman (talk · contribs) 02:45, 27 January 2019 (UTC)
- I will be reviewing the article. Comments are coming shortly. --K.e.coffman (talk) 02:45, 27 January 2019 (UTC)
Initial comments:
- "...Nazi invitations to visit concentration camps" -- perhaps better as "German invitations".
- Done
- "The prewar Geneva Conventions did not protect civilians, limiting the ICRC's leverage against the German government.[4] However, the ICRC was not limited by the Geneva Conventions..." -- this is a bit confusing since it says that ICRC was both limited and not limited by the convention.
- Clarified this.
- "...was considered one of the only remaining..." - considered by whom?
- It's not clear. Steinacher states that he "was often praised" as such, but he doesn't seem to fully endorse that viewpoint. I added a quote from Favez in a note.
- "[ICRC]...discovered that it was possible to send medicines..." and then: "In March 1943, in response to an ICRC inquiry, the DRK stated that it was impossible to send food and medical aid to Theresienstadt", which seems a bit contradictory.
- Fixed
- "by the Jewish elder" -- does this mean a member of Judenrat?
- Yes, added clarification
- "secured permission" -- from whom?
- Added "from the SS"
- "causing an unduly positive impression of Theresienstadt to develop..." -- who developed this impression? the public, Jewish organisations, politicians, etc?
- Removed. It's not really clear what Rothkirchen means.
- "Rossel claimed" -- perhaps Better "Rossel's report stated..." as "claimed" creates the impression that he was willingly fabricating.
- Done
--K.e.coffman (talk) 01:32, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
- Thanks for the review! I hope I have fixed everything to your satisfaction. buidhe 10:18, 31 January 2019 (UTC)
Assessment against GA criteria
[edit]- It is reasonably well written.
- It is factually accurate and verifiable.
- a (reference section):
b (citations to reliable sources):
c (OR):
d (copyvio and plagiarism):
- a (reference section):
- It is broad in its coverage.
- a (major aspects):
b (focused):
- a (major aspects):
- It follows the neutral point of view policy.
- Fair representation without bias:
- Fair representation without bias:
- It is stable.
- No edit wars, etc.:
- No edit wars, etc.:
- 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):
- a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales):
- Overall: Nice work on the article; thank you. K.e.coffman (talk) 04:32, 1 February 2019 (UTC)
- Pass/Fail:
- Pass/Fail: