Talk:Maurice Rossel/GA1

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

Reviewer: MX (talk · contribs) 02:12, 30 October 2018 (UTC)

Review
Hi, will review this article in the next few days.


 * General comments: Article looks ripe for promotion. Is there a reason why there isn't an infobox / image?
 * I could not find any obituaries for him, so it is possible that he is still alive (more likely, his family did not publish an obituary because history has not looked on him kindly). He was last seen in 1997, but BLP still applies and I can't upload a fair-use image under Wikipedia policy. The biographical details are also pretty scant, so I'm not sure there's enough substance for an infobox. Thanks for reviewing! Catrìona (talk) 02:44, 30 October 2018 (UTC)

Look forward to reading this! MX ( ✉  •  ✎  ) 02:12, 30 October 2018 (UTC)

Section organization
I want to give a suggestion on how the sections could be organized. The first section covers his early life and then talks about his life after the Holocaust, and then the following sections go back in time to talk about his visits to the camps. Wouldn't it be better to have the article flow chronologically? Something like Early life and career → Theresienstadt visit → Auschwitz visit → Life after the Holocaust (which would include subsections like the A Visitor from the Living → Impact and assessment → and Later life, like the details of him burying his memories and illness in 1997).

This article is a biography, so having a section called "Biography" is not very useful, in my opinion. Breaking the sections down in the order of when they occurred in his life would be helpful for our readers.
 * That's fair. The problem is that the article is very unbalanced because RS coverage focuses very narrowly on a couple days of his life, and I thought there wasn't enough biographical information to justify multiple sections, but I've changed the organization based on your suggestions.

Lead paragraph

 * – Doesn't the Red Cross dispute this and say he visited a few days before (per the footnote)? Is it generally accepted that he indeed visited the camp on the day those prisoners were murdered? If we are going to include this in the lead we need most sources to agree on that.
 * I would say that it is generally accepted, because Karny is a well respected historian and he actually investigated it. The ICRC webpage cites no sources for the date, and the most likely explanation for a discrepancy is a typo on their part. However, because of the BLP issue I've changed the lede.


 * Just wanted to comment on the refs in the lead and direct quotations. MOS:LEADCITE says quotations in the lead require inline citations, but from my understanding, it can be interpreted as requiring a source elsewhere (in the sections), since the following paragraph says editors should avoid adding redundant refs in the lead. Take a look at today's FA: Gevninge helmet fragment. It has a few direct quotes in the lead, but since they are cited elsewhere, the refs are not required in the lead. Hope this helps for future articles of yours! MX ( ✉  •  ✎  ) 21:49, 30 October 2018 (UTC)

Biography

 * – Was this something he claimed? The word “apparently” may throw off readers as speculative. If this is something he said/wrote, mention that.
 * Reflects the wording in the source, but is cited to A Visitor from the Living so is presumably Rossel's claim; changed appropriately.


 * – not an expert in this field, but would “concentration camps” be more accurate? Perhaps this might be useful for the first mention, and then “camp” in future mentions.
 * Specified prisoner of war camps.


 * – “… put him in contact with prisoners who were aware…”?


 * – I would say, “After World War II, ..."

Theresienstadt visit

 * - Since you’ve been using ICRC all along, I would use that instead of Red Cross. Make sure to be consistent in other mentions too.
 * ✅ here, but in many places "Red Cross" is used for a more general reference, for instance including Rossel and the Danish repesentatives, who were affiliated with the Danish Red Cross.


 * – I would say “around the same time” but feel free to keep your phrasing if you think it is better.


 * – link with Ministry of Health (Denmark)


 * – link with Minister of Foreign Affairs (Denmark)


 * – write: “by several senior Schutzstaffel (SS) officials”, since it is their first introduction


 * – gave
 * Changed to "to give"


 * – Not sure what “at right” means
 * Attempting to clarify that this is the same picture which is included in the article, which was probably at right when I wrote the sentence. Changed wording to "above".

A Visitor from the Living

 * – Did not express


 * – “... if he stood … answered that he did”


 * – “stated that he remembered”


 * – Can we redlink this per WP:REDLINK?
 * It's a topic notable enough for its own article, but currently redirects to Maurice Rossel per Wikipedia redirect policy, so it won't redlink.

Impact and assessment

 * – is the Terezín Initiative noteworthy enough for a redlink too?

Categories

 * – How do you feel about removing this category since he is not confirmed dead? Per WP:BDP, he is covered until he's 115 years old. If he was born in 1910, he's still close to 108. In addition, how did you get the circa 1917? Was his aged mentioned at some point? We can use a age convert template for that.
 * There's somewhat conflicting information on Rossel's exact age:
 * NYT article: "as he looked back to Theresienstadt from the vantage of 1979, when he was a comfortably situated 60-year-old"
 * Farré and Schubert have him 27 years old in 1944, which is probably more reliable.
 * I don't know how to use an age convert template, unfortunately. Catrìona (talk) 21:09, 30 October 2018 (UTC)
 * I've added it. Let me know what source it is exactly and we can add it in the body too. MX ( ✉  •  ✎  ) 21:30, 30 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Farré, Sébastien; Schubert, Yan (2009). "L'illusion de l'objectif" [The Illusion of the Objective]. Le Mouvement Social (in French). 227 (2): 65–83. doi:10.3917/lms.227.0065. Thanks! Catrìona (talk) 21:40, 30 October 2018 (UTC)
 * What page exactly? MX ( ✉  •  ✎  ) 21:42, 30 October 2018 (UTC)
 * 73. Catrìona (talk) 21:44, 30 October 2018 (UTC)


 * Passing GA. All my concerns have been addressed. Nice job! MX ( ✉  •  ✎  ) 00:24, 31 October 2018 (UTC)