Talk:Defense of Brest Fortress/GA1

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

Good article nomination on hold
This article's Good Article promotion has been put on hold. During review, some issues were discovered that can be resolved without a major re-write. This is how the article, as of July 1, 2008, compares against the six good article criteria:


 * 1. Well written?:


 * 1) The lead is short. See:WP:LS.
 * 2) The siege is a long section. Due to the fact that it's the main part of the article, I suggest breaking it to several sub-sections. For example you can divide it into The first day, Resistance and Fall of the fortress.
 * 3) The result of the resistance should not be in Hero fortress section. I think there should be separate section for this issue:The resilience of the fortress defenders did not significantly affect the German early successes as the Wermacht fast advance into the Soviet territory proceeded largely according to the German plan leaving the fighting fortress well behind the front line.[4] The Soviet General Staff, however, realized the importance of fiercely defending towns and villages on the way of the enemies advance as evidenced in its November note.[4]
 * 2. Factually accurate?:


 * Infobox:
 * 1) Contradiction between Russian casualties in infobox and body of the article: It's written in infobox that just 400 soldiers of USSR had been captured while the text says:The initial bombardment took the unprepared fortress by surprise, inflicting heavy material and personnel casualties.[7] or n June 26 the Soviet forces tried to break out from the siege but were unsuccessful and sustained heavy casualties.
 * 2) It's written in infobox that the defense ended on June 30 but the text contradicts with it:Major Pyotr Gavrilov, one of the best known defenders of Brest (later decorated for it as Hero of the Soviet Union) was captured only on July 23.[9][10][8] There were reports that isolated defenders were weeded out by Germans as late as in August.[10] 
 * It has been described as endnote. I propose merging it in the body.
 * Opposing forces
 * 1) It's written:The 3,500-strong defending force comprised regular soldiers, border guards and NKVD men.[4]... up to a total of 7 to 8 thousand people... There were also 300 families of servicemen inside as well. I checked the sources., There are different speculation. Apparently the late is more definite. Thus I propose clarifying the issue. Another source says On the night of the attack there were 7000-8000 men from various units including personnel of the garrison hospital and medical unit. More over the families - wives and children - of the servicemen were inside the fortress.
 * I found it has been described as endnote. It's a good way to clarify the infobox but the body of the article has remained unclear. I propose merging it in the body.
 * Add sources: There are several citation needed tag on the article. Please add reliable sources instead.
 * 3. Broad in coverage?:


 * 1) I think there should be a section which describes Brest Fortress, its strategic importance, its structure, etc in brief.
 * 4. Neutral point of view?:


 * 1) Hero Fortress is a title for propaganda. It should be substituted with more neutral one.
 * 5. Article stability?: Pass
 * 6. Images?:

There are many pictures which you can use in the article.

Please address these matters soon and then leave a note here showing how they have been resolved. After 48 hours the article should be reviewed again. Thank you for your work so far.-- Seyyed(t-c) 14:47, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Failed "good article" nomination
This article failed good article nomination. This is how the article, as of July 7, 2008, compares against the six good article criteria:


 * 1. Well written?: Fail
 * 2. Factually accurate?: Fail
 * 3. Broad in coverage?: Fail
 * 4. Neutral point of view?: Fail
 * 5. Article stability? Pass
 * 6. Images?:

When these issues are addressed, the article can be renominated. If you feel that this review is in error, feel free to take it have it reassessed. Thank you for your work so far.-- Seyyed(t-c) 15:38, 7 July 2008 (UTC)