Talk:Battle of Murowana Oszmianka/GA1

GA Review
This review is transcluded from Talk:Battle of Murowana Oszmianka/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Hi there, I have reviewed this article against the good article criteria and although I am not quite prepared to pass the article for GA immediately, I don't think there is a long way to go. I have listed below the principle problems which prevent this article from achieving GA status and I have also appended a list of other comments which, whilst they are not essential for GA, may help in the future development of the article. I have also given the article a thorough copyedit. The article now has seven days to address these issues, and should the contributors disagree with my comments then please indicate below why you disagree and suggest a solution, compromise or explanation. Further time will be granted if a concerted effort is being made to address the problems, and as long as somebody is genuinely trying to deal with the issues raised then I will not fail the article. I am aware that my standards are quite high, but I feel that an article deserves as thorough a review as possible when applying for GA and that a tough review process here is an important stepping stone to future FAC attempts. Please do not take offence at anything I have said, nothing is meant personally and maliciously and if anyone feels aggrieved then please notify me at once and I will attempt to clarify the comments in question. Finally, should anyone disagree with my review or eventual decision then please take the article to WP:GAR to allow a wider selection of editors to comment on the issues discussed here. Well done on the work so far.--Jackyd101 (talk) 00:45, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Issues preventing promotion
(These issues must be satisfactorily addressed, in the article itself or here, before GA promotion can go ahead)
 * "the Germans decided to transfer" - Clarify which Germans; the German government of Lithuania? the Wehrmacht? who?
 * The sources were not clear on that, I am afraid. The order was presumably given by the superiors of the Lithuanian Territorial Defense Force; how high in the c-o-c it originated is not covered by the sources.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 16:36, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I cahnged this to German authorities since it is not clear exactly which authority was responsible.--Jackyd101 (talk) 10:03, 26 June 2008 (UTC)


 * " the towns of Oszmiany" - Oszmiany is only one town, either add more or lose the plural
 * Presumed typo fixed.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 16:36, 23 June 2008 (UTC)


 * "The Lithuanian troops, however, satisfied by their perceived superiority, started pacifying the local Polish communities suspected of harboring the partisans" - Firstly clarify the percieved superiority; are we talking in terms of numbers, weapons, morale, arrogance, what? Secondly, "pacify" is a word with more than one meaning. Try to be more specific about what their intentions were, if you mean intimidate or attack then say so.
 * I am afraid I don't have the refs with me to look it up in detail, but as far as I remember, the perceived superiority was both numerical and in armament. Pacification refers to both intimidation and occasional killings.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 16:36, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
 * If that is what pacification means in this context, you either need to link it to a relevant article or wikitionary page, or explain the meaning in this article itself. Pacification is a word with several related meanings and it should be clearer in what sense it is meant when used here.--Jackyd101 (talk) 10:03, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I have changed it to "suppressing" which should be less confusing.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 17:12, 26 June 2008 (UTC)


 * The detailed plan needs to a) if it is a quote it must be properly identified as such - see if there is a nice box that goes around it. b) If it is not a quote then it is in the wrong tense. This is a big problem, and as I cannot read the sources I cannot properly advise what solution to use. Having said that, my advice would be that if it is not a quote then it should be a paragraph of prose instead.
 * The detailed plan, from Banasikowski, is a direct translation from his work. He doesn't clarify if its a quote of some document or not.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 16:36, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Is it formatted in this way in Banasikowski? Since it is a direct quote, you have to make that much more clear, perhaps as I mentioned with a box or quote marks.--Jackyd101 (talk) 10:03, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, it is formatted that way in Banaskikowski. Do you mean Template:Cquote? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 17:13, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm a little confused. Is this text from a primary source or from Banaskikowski's historical secondary source? I think it would help if the article stated explicitly where the text comes from and seperated it from the text around it in someway (either a box or cquotes or similar). As it is it looks a little odd as it is not clear that this is a quote from somewhere.--Jackyd101 (talk) 11:42, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Can you please address this by the end of the week or I will have to fail the nomination. I need you to either a) break the list up into text using your own words to describe the objectives or b) format it exactly as in the sources and make it very clear that it is a direct quote, preferably with the use of a box or similar. Thankyou.--Jackyd101 (talk) 16:14, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
 * OK, the above hasn't happened and although I don't think this article is far off from GA, I also don't think it is there yet, sorry. Look at the comments above and try to make improvements in the article's comprehensivveness and most importantly in its style, especially when it comes to quotes.--Jackyd101 (talk) 08:38, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Other comments
(These comments are not essential to passing GAN)
 * Any chance of an image? Some were mentioned above as possibilities. If not, even a map showing the 1944 Polish-Lithuanian border region might help give the article a little more context for people like myself unfamiliar with the place or event.
 * There was no PL border, as the territories belonged to Reichskommissariat Ostland. As you can see, we don't have any detailed maps for that article, unfortunately. If I ever find a relevant image, I'll do my best to add it to the article(s) here.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 16:38, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Fair enough.--Jackyd101 (talk) 10:03, 26 June 2008 (UTC)