Talk:Ante Pavelić/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Reviewer: Kebeta (talk) 17:56, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

I am planning to review this article. --Kebeta (talk) 17:56, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Big problems

 * Some work has been done to improve this article, but unfortunatley I believe that there is still quite a way to go. IMHO this meets the GA quick-fail criteria as large sections are unreferenced and therefore fails Verifiability.
 * The other problem is copy edit tag, which I think is a valid one, which also meets the GA quick-fail criteria.

Minor problems

 * The lead is short, take a look at WP:LEAD. The article should have an appropriate number of paragraphs as is shown on WP:LEAD, and should adequately summarize the article.
 * ✅-- Wusten  fuchs  14:05, 21 March 2011 (UTC)


 * The topic is slightly treated in non-neutral way.
 * ❌ - can you be more correct with this, so I can fix those things...?-- Wusten  fuchs  11:12, 9 April 2011 (UTC)


 * The structure of the article could be improved. Section 'Ustaše regime' looks to big, maybe a subsection there?
 * ❌ - Few chaps tried this, but ther are no good way to devide the section...-- Wusten  fuchs  11:12, 9 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Watch for redundancies that make the article too wordy instead of being crisp and concise.
 * Inconsistent referenced style, some inline citations have a page number, some don't...Book references need the author, publishing date and page number and preferably should include the publisher, city of publication and ISBN.
 * Wikilinks should only be made if they are relevant to the context. Common words do not need wikilinking.
 * I'm doing it right now.-- Wusten  fuchs  11:16, 9 April 2011 (UTC)


 * It is recommended not to specify the size of images. The sizes should be what readers have specified in their user preferences.
 * ❌, I don't think that's one of the conditions, I needed to do so in order to make article more "readable". Just look at that government image, and those below.-- Wusten  fuchs  11:16, 9 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Text should not be sandwiched between two adjacent images, like in 'Ustaše regime' section.
 * ✅, I fixed this.-- Wusten  fuchs  11:16, 9 April 2011 (UTC)


 * It would be nice to have more images in the article, maybe a map of NDH, or another image of Ante Pavelić...
 * ✅ I added some images long time ago... But ther aren't so many pics of him.-- Wusten  fuchs  11:16, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

There are also many other minor problems, but this is just to get you going. Unfortunately, given the amount of work required I am going to have to fail this rather than place it on hold. However, I do believe that one day soon, this could be brought up to GA standard, and I would encourage the editors to add the citations required and then maybe request a peer review before putting it up for another GA nomination. However, although a quick fail, I added some minor problems that could help for another GA Review. Since this is my first GA Review, I invite other editors to corect me in assesment if they think that this article should not be failed. Regards, Kebeta (talk) 14:47, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Ideas to improve
I was reading the article, and agreing with all Kebeta has pointed out, I just found some other minor issues, that I touht may be usufull to mention here:
 * In the section "Birth and education", his health problems are mentioned a number of times, but sounds stange to never specify them.
 * ❌ I don't have sources about this.-- Wusten  fuchs  13:56, 21 March 2011 (UTC)


 * In the "Rise in politics" section, it´s said that he "became vice-president of the Croatian Bar Association.". I wan´t be exagerating if I would say that some readers may think that "Bar" means Pubs... Some short explanation on what the association was would be helpfull. In the next sentence, it would be usefull just to say who Pašić was, so the relation between them makes sence. Also, somewhere in the early part of this section feels like the transition from Austro-Hungary to Yugoslavia is missing. I mean, all of us know when Yugoslavia started, but the less informed readers may not.
 * ✅ -- Wusten  fuchs  13:56, 21 March 2011 (UTC)


 * In the "Life in exile" section, in the sentence about the Velebit Uprising, the word "scared" sounds a bit silly. I mean, the text goes well, then sudently here... I don´t know, I think it could be better worded.
 * ✅ -- Wusten  fuchs  13:56, 21 March 2011 (UTC)


 * In the "Ustaše regime", under the Croatian-Italian relations, the word "fascist terror" in the sentence ending with "and those areas were under Italianization and fascist terror" escapes from the rest of the narrative. It should be replaced with something more convenient, or eliminated. The following sentences also lack some sence, seem POV and some are gramatically incorrect.
 * ✅ -- Wusten  fuchs  13:56, 21 March 2011 (UTC)


 * I did some edits in this section to facilitate grammar fluidity, however, the section needs more content work. Also, as well recomended by Kebeta, it´s too large, and could easily be divided into sections.
 * ❌ I can't find places wher I would devide this section, your help would be good. -- Wusten  fuchs  13:56, 21 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Also, some editor used several times the expression "scared". It could be replace by "affraid", or some other options...
 * ✅ -- Wusten  fuchs  13:56, 21 March 2011 (UTC)


 * "... and reader of papers in that time could get impression that only job of pope was hiding Ustaša's Poglavnik..." Puhhh, no comment.
 * ✅ -- Wusten  fuchs  14:02, 21 March 2011 (UTC) (:


 * The post-war part looks good.

Resumingly, some parts, specially the ones regarding WWII need to be brought out of POV. They are not many, but in few cases the "cheering feeling" is still possible to see. The grammar is clearly better in some parts, and bad in others. Some parts have repetitivness, some other lack explanation. I personally think that the part of the reasons behind the Croatian discontent in the pre-WWII period and the subsequent acceptance of the regime is worth exploring a little bit more. The rest was already said by Kebeta and my comment here was completelly donne as complementary to his observations. Hoping that my critics contribute to bring this article to the desired level, I finish my comment. FkpCascais (talk) 03:49, 16 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Thank you for this. I'll solve all that in the morning.-- Wusten  fuchs  22:47, 20 March 2011 (UTC)


 * I´ll see if I can tonight spare some time to give you some options on how to divide the section. I´ll post the option/s here so we can discussed them. FkpCascais (talk) 17:47, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

No problem, I can wait.-- Wusten  fuchs  21:20, 23 March 2011 (UTC)


 * OK, I´m having troubles to provide any ideas since it is basically all arounf WWII. I initially touth possible having some sort of chronological subsections (Beggining of war, ...) but they are hard to name and it doesn´t sound like a good idea with the text we have. We could go in a different way, to subtitles of the tipe ("Internal policies", "International relations", etc.) but we would have to change the text then but anyway, that would be more related with the regime itself than with AP. The only reasonable idea I came out now is to begin with "World War II" at begining, and an "Aftermath" (or End of war, or similar) undersection with the last paragraph... I´m just out of ideas... Kebeta, help? Wustenfuchs, any other or complementary ideas? FkpCascais (talk) 11:16, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

After you wroted that you will find a solution for this, I tried my self to see a places wher he can split a section, but I could not get any ideas, so I waited you to do that. I think that we could solve this problem if we could find more about Pavelić in WW2, so I tried that with Enlish books, but it doesn't work because all of those sources deal with general history of NDH at the time... But still, I'll do what I can do. If Kebeta has any idea maybe...-- Wusten  fuchs  21:01, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Protection
Protected for 3 days due to edit warring over the info-box. Shouldn't take long to sort it out as you have already been discussing it on talkpages. Then it can be unprotected. Please remember all Balkans articles are subject to ArbCom enforcement procedures.Fainites barley scribs 13:58, 22 March 2011 (UTC)


 * No problem with me...-- Wusten  fuchs  16:22, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Ok Fainites, me and DIREKTOR have made a compromise. You can unlock the article now, it seams we solve this out far earlier. :) -- Wusten  fuchs  18:10, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Ok. Fainites barley scribs 19:12, 22 March 2011 (UTC)