Talk:Martin Bormann/GA1

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

Reviewer: Jonas Vinther (talk · contribs) 13:49, 6 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Well-written
 * a. The prose is clear and concise, it respects copyright laws, and the spelling and grammar are correct
 * b. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation

The article is well-written indeed, with a few "errors" or suggestions which I will list below.


 * 1. "was a prominent official in Nazi Germany, head of the Parteikanzlei (Nazi Party Chancellery)" - how about this wording "was a prominent official in Nazi Germany as head of the Parteikanzlei (Nazi Party Chancellery)".


 * 2. "Bormann joined the Nazi Party in 1927 and the Schutzstaffel (SS) in 1937" - I noticed many other articles regarding Nazi officials show membership numbers of both the Nazi Party and the SS in the lead, might consider doing that as well here (if they can be found).


 * 3. "he began acting as Hitler's personal secretary in 1935, a post he was officially appointed to in 1943" - how about this wording "he began acting as Hitler's personal secretary in 1935, but was not officially appointed to the post until 1943".


 * 4. "Bormann was tried in absentia by the International Military Tribunal in the Nuremberg trials of 1945–46" - might consider shortly mentioning what in absentia means.


 * 5. "Born in Wegeleben (now in Saxony-Anhalt)" - how about "Born in Wegeleben (now part of Saxony-Anhalt)"


 * 6. "but served on garrison duty" - that does not grammerly make sense, should be changed to, " but served garrison duty".


 * 7. "had Freikorps volunteer paramilitary units" - this sounds wrong when you say it out loud. The lead already mentioned what a Freikorps is so consider changing it to "had Freikorps volunteer units".


 * 8. "a short-lived paramilitary organisation created to replace the Sturmabteilung (SA; storm detachment or assault division)" - how come it doesn't mention the SA was a Nazi organization? How about this wording "a short-lived paramilitary organisation created to replace the Nazi Party's Sturmabteilung (SA; storm detachment or assault division)"


 * 9. "the National Socialist German Workers Party (Nazi Party; NSDAP)" - is it really necessary to mention all three titles?


 * 10. "Bormann used his position to create an extensive bureaucracy and involve himself in as much of the decision making as possible" ... "Bormann was gaining acceptance into Hitler's inner circle, and accompanied him everywhere, providing briefings and summaries of events and requests" - isn't these two sentences the exact same wording that is used in the lead? If so, might considering reformulating the lead or the body text.


 * 11. "Hitler gave Bormann control his personal finances" - the word "of" is missing between "control" and "his".


 * 12. "Hitler's income included money raised through royalties collected on Mein Kampf and the use of his image on postage stamps" - one could mention some of the huge sales of Mein Kampf and also that Hitler received both the Chancellor salary and the Presidents salary, which ... were not a low salary combined. But this is just a suggestion.


 * 13. "Bormann took notes of Hitler's thoughts, expressed over dinner and in monologues late into the night, and preserved them. The material was published after the war as Hitler's Table Talk" - how about adding ", among others," in between "Bormann" and "took", as he was one of a dozen people.


 * 14. "and mandated the removal of crucifixes from classrooms" - this is super interesting! It's true that Nazi's initiated a removal of crucifixes from classrooms, However, in 1941, a Christian mother wrote to the local education authority: "As a mother of eight, our Führer awarded me the Mother's Cross in gold. It is incomprehensible to me that my youngest, who I led to school last Sunday, should not see a crucifix there, after his seven siblings grew up in the shadow of crucifix. I often contemplate and cannot solve the mystery how such a measure is possible at all, since our Führer stands by his soldiers in the East and fight against Bolshevism." Despite the fact many top Nazi's, including Hitler, loathed Christianity, this letter influenced Hitler to reverse the policy of removing crucifixes, because it was damaging German morale. Might consider mentioning that the policy was removed. If you choose to add it, let me know and I will find the source to support the claim.


 * 15. "Goebbels and his wife Magda committed suicide later that day" - no mention of the six children?


 * Verifiable with no original research
 * a. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline
 * b. It provides in-line citations from reliable sources for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines
 * c. It contains no original research

I'm very satisfied with the sources used. Virtually all the authors of the books cited are highly respected and renowned. The sources are all fairly new, with the oldest being from 1973. All in all, this articles has excellent sources cited.


 * Broad in its coverage
 * a. It addresses the main aspects of the topic
 * b. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail

The article is good, almost perfectly written - it features most aspects of Bormann's life and does not include misleading, confusion, or non-needed information, nor does it go into unnecessary detail.


 * Neutral

Most of the controversial things involving Bormann mentioned in this article is related to the overall crimes of the Nazi's during World War II (such as the persecution of Churches, Jews, Priests, Poles, Slavs, etc.) and the article is very acceptable in terms of neutrality.


 * Stable

The article is not the subject of heated or constant discussion on talk page, and is not the subject on-going edit wars (the latest revisions is of edits performed by IP-addresses).


 * Illustrated

The article contains 4 images (one in infobox) and one video clip. All the photos and the video are from the German Bundesarchiv, and uploaded to Wikimedia Commons as part of a cooperation project.

With the article meeting the GA-criteria, and the points mentioned in the "well-written" section being more or less suggestions and a few minor grammer-errors I'm going to pass it. Excellent job, guys. :)
 * Pass, fail, hold?


 * Hi Jonas and thanks for the detailed helpful suggestions, some of which I have implemented. Unfortunately none of the sources I used included his party number or SS number. Some of your suggestions (in absentia, Goebbels children) were not implemented as in my opinion they're a bit off-topic for this article. In English we don't say a town is "part" of a territory, we say it is "in" the territory. If you locate a source about the crucifix rule being repealed, please post on the article talk page or simply make the edit yourself if you like. Thanks again and best wishes. -- Diannaa (talk) 16:17, 6 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Diannaa, this BBC-source will support the crucifix-lift claim.


 * And what I like to point out (because it's a documentary) that it's written by Laurence Rees and Ian Kershaw. Jonas Vinther (speak to me!) 17:11, 6 September 2014 (UTC)
 * I have been gone all day; thanks guys for the work. I will add his party and SS numbers. Kierzek (talk) 00:23, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
 * I see we did add his party number and the SS number he was "granted" in 1938 in the body of the article already (I had forgotten); I did add his "original" SS number with page cite. Kierzek (talk) 00:27, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Good job, Kierzek. :) Jonas Vinther (speak to me!) 12:37, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Good job, Kierzek. :) Jonas Vinther (speak to me!) 12:37, 7 September 2014 (UTC)