Talk:Nuremberg Laws/GA1

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

Reviewer: Calvin999 (talk · contribs) 11:02, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

Additional comments by Jonas Vinther
Some comments for improvements, chew on 'em.


 * "were antisemitic laws in Nazi Germany" - I suggest this is reformulated to "were a set of antisemitic laws in Nazi Germany" ? will think about this
 * "The two Nuremberg Laws" - I suggest this is reformulated to "The two protocols of the Nuremberg Laws" "protocol" implies diplomatic documents, not internal laws.
 * "which forbade marriages and extramarital intercourse" - Link extramarital intercourse?
 * "Discrimination against Jews began immediately after the seizure of power" - How about mentioning that discrimination against also occurred before Hitler came to power and then intensified after he came to power? This sentence kinda' strikes me like the Nazis were waiting until they came to power to use violence against opponents.
 * "The two Nuremberg Laws were passed in this special session" - Again, I suggest the protocol wording.
 * "Out of foreign policy concerns, the laws were not actively enforced until after the 1936 Summer Olympics, held in Berlin" - I suggest reformulating this to "Out of foreign policy concerns, the laws were not actively enforced until after the 1936 Summer Olympics, held in berlin, which showcased the Third Reich on the international stage". a bit off-topic
 * "By 1938 it was almost impossible for potential Jewish emigrants to find a country willing to take them" - Consider mentioning why this was so. Did the neighboring counties fear hostility from Germany if they accepted Jews? Did neighboring counties share the same anti-Semitism as Germany? Did Germany force neighboring counties into not taking them in?
 * "and sometime around December 1941, Hitler resolved that the Jews of Europe were to be exterminated" - I suggest reformulating to "and in December 1941, Hitler, in conversation with SS-Reichsführer Heinrich Himmler, decided that the Jews of Europe were to be exterminated". Hitler decided.
 * "Jews became equal citizens with the creation of the new German constitution of 1871" - I suggest reformulating to "Jews became equal citizens with the creation of the new German constitution which followed the formation" to avoid mentioning 1871 twice in a row.
 * "Hitler dictated Mein Kampf (My Struggle; originally entitled Four and a Half Years of Struggle against Lies, Stupidity, and Cowardice)" - I suggest omitting the original title mention, seems a bit to unimportant. Also, link Mein Kampf, it's not linked in the entire article. Good suggestion
 * "Discrimination against Jews began immediately after the seizure of power" - Again, I suggest reformulating to something like "Discrimination against Jews intensified immediately after the seizure of power"
 * "Gestapo report from the spring of 1935" - I've been told it's a bad practice to use seasons as half the world has opposite seasons. Good catch :)
 * "favoured bringing in tougher new antisemitic laws in 1935" - I suggest adding a comma in between "tougher" and "new. ? not sure, will think about it
 * "They arrived on 14 September" - If we're talking about the summoned ministers or Reichstag dignitaries I suggest replacing "They" with "The dignitaries and minsters" or something by name to avoid confusion. Medicus and Lösener arrived on that date.
 * "The two Nuremberg Laws" - Again, I suggest the protocol wording.
 * "13 supplementary laws were promulgated that progressively marginalised the Jewish community in Germany" - I suggest replacing "progressively" with "further".
 * "the Reichstag has unanimously adopted the following law" - Why present tense? I suggest omitting "has", the sentence would still be grammarly correct. Same goes for the "has" mention in the Reich Citizenship Law sub-section. The law says, "Der Reichstag hat einstimmig das folgend..."
 * "Hitler continued to stall, and did not make a decision until early November" - Since this is a new section I suggest mentioning what year is referred to in question, also because this section goes on to mention specific months, but no year.
 * "proving one's racial heritage became a necessary part of daily life" - I suggest reformulating this to "proving one's racial heritage became a necessary part of daily life, especially for members of Nazi-associated originations". Not done. I don't have access to this source, so I can't confirm the content is there. Besides, it gradually became necessary for everyone to prove their race, not just party members and those interested in government jobs.
 * "Former middle-class or wealthy business owners were forced to take employment in menial jobs to support their families, if work could be found at all" - The "if work could be found at all" bit strikes me as WP:POV.
 * "Allies of the Nazis" - Link Axis Powers?
 * Reference #18 has only one "p", but cites two pages. Reference #60 also has only one "p", but cites two pages. Reference #61 has two "pp" listed when only citing one page.

All in all, excellent job. Very interesting article written at a very high level. Ehrfürchtig :) Jonas Vinther • (speak to me!) 21:00, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Hi Jonas. Thanks for the valuable feedback and your kind words. I have acted on most of your suggestions. -- Diannaa (talk) 22:14, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Kein problem. :) Jonas Vinther • (speak to me!) 22:51, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

I haven't read any of the comments above so if I point out anything that has already been bought up, let me know.


 * Lead
 * to implement their party platform, → I don't understand what is meant by implementing a 'party platform'? Do you mean policies? Changed to "policies".
 * race, and racial → A bit repetitive. Comma not needed.
 * Didn't they also based it on religion and sexuality?
 * "Jewish" is a religion as well as a race. Other religions were not persecuted. Persons were persecuted based on sexual orientation, but that was not part of the Nuremberg Laws, and is off-topic to include in the lead of this article.
 * Link Jews
 * who would be stripped → who were stripped (as it really did happen)
 * and civil rights and removed → repetition of 'and'. I think this sentence as a whole needs restructuring.
 * Re-worded; see what you think.
 * the seizure of power. → seizure is when you have a seizure in the medical sense. I think you mean 'seizing power'
 * "Seizure of power" is the term usually used; see Machtergreifung. Nevertheless I have changed it.
 * Say that Hitler was the leader.
 * The two Nuremberg Laws were passed in this special session. → Same two as in the paragraph above? Which were already passed?
 * I have re-ordered the material to remove the repetition.
 * A supplementary decree outlining the definition of who was Jewish was passed on 14 November, and the Reich Citizenship Law came into force on that date. → Is this a bit obvious? if it was passed on that day, then it's obvious that's the date it was enforced?
 * See the next point
 * Out of foreign policy concerns, the laws were not actively enforced until after the 1936 Summer Olympics, held in Berlin. → This seems to contradict what you just said?
 * The Reich Citizenship Law was passed at the special session on 15 September, but did not officially come into force until 14 November 1935, as Hitler had not yet decided who all would be included as Jews. They didn't actively start prosecuting people until after the 1936 Summer Olympics. I have re-worded the material to try to clarify.


 * Background
 * Prior to the formation of Germany in 1871 → Link Germany as German Empire
 * Link First World War
 * radical antisemitism, and → Don't need a comma
 * Yes we do, as the article uses serial commas throughout.


 * Nazi Germany
 * after the seizure of power → after power was seized by the Nazi's
 * The Law for the Restoration of the Professional Civil Service, passed on 7 April, excluded non-Aryans from the legal profession and civil service. → Make sure citations are at the end of each sentence.
 * naturalised Germans → naturalised German-Jews?


 * Text of the laws
 * Where are the sources for each of the articles in Law for the Protection of German Blood and German Honour section and the Reich Citizenship Law section?
 * The laws in their entirety are sourced to the US Holocaust Memorial Museum. I think placing an identical citation after each article is redundant.
 * So where is the citation? I don't think it's very clear. —  ₳aron  07:57, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
 * I've added it after each article. -- Diannaa (talk) 13:16, 15 April 2015 (UTC)


 * Outcome
 * On hold —  ₳aron  14:36, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
 * I think I have addressed your concerns; please let me know it there's anything I have missed. Thanks for reviewing. -- Diannaa (talk) 19:49, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

Passing. — ₳aron  16:44, 15 April 2015 (UTC)