Talk:Partisan Congress riots

Copy edit
Hi. Bad luck - you got me. As usual, I shall be on the bold side with my copy editing. As usual, don't hesitate to flag up here anything you don't see the reason for or disagree with - or if I twist a source. Or if I write garbage, just revert it. As you have specified FAC I shall also throw in, entirely free of charge, occasional passing comments more suited to a FAC review. Cheers. Gog the Mild (talk) 10:03, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

That's my first rough run through completed. If you could give some thought to the points above, I'll then have another go, incorporating as necessary any of your responses and picking up bits I missed first time. Gog the Mild (talk) 21:03, 12 March 2020 (UTC)
 * "regardless of whether the original owner was deemed worthy" I am really struggling to work out what this means.
 * Removed. I guess I was trying to highlight a difference in viewpoint: (in general) non-Jews wanted to distribute property according to the merits of the person (whether they were a partisan or veteran, etc.) while Jews tended to focus on the legality/morality of the transaction, and wanted to negate Aryanization for that reason.
 * "identifiable groups assaulted Jews on various streets" What's an "identifiable group"?
 * I'm not entirely sure, so I took this out.
 * "Kapucínska and Zámocká" Are these streets, Jews, or identifiable groups?
 * Streets, clarified
 * "was an annual gathering for Slovak partisans which took place 2–4 August 1946" It can't be an annual gathering if it [only] took place in 1946. (And how long a tradition did it have by the year after the war ended? If it was the second, it might be pushing it to call it annual, even if we now know that that is what it developed into.)
 * Removed "annual" and reworded.
 * "On the night of 31 July/1 August (Wednesday/Thursday)[37] or 1 August/2 August (Thursday/Friday)" If the date is unclear then a note as to why may be helpful.
 * I removed the first reference, since I realized that Cichopek may not be referring to the same incident as the other sources.
 * "Jews present were assaulted and 15,000 Kčs was stolen" That seems lot. Was that what the Jews robbed happened to have on their persons?
 * Not as much as it seems (I've added currency conversions into USD.) The source isn't clear but I think it refers to money that was held by the kitchen, e.g. for buying food.
 * "Jews were attacked on the streets, especially Leningradská and Laurinská" I think that you need to somehow indicate that the last two are streets. (I assume they are streets.) I am not sure how.
 * Added "Streets" at the end, although this is a bit clunky it avoids any confusion.
 * Quotes: note the second sentence of this from the MoS "The reader must be able to determine the source of any quotation, at the very least via a footnote. The source must be named in article text if the quotation is an opinion". (My emphasis.)
 * I went back through and added some attribution. If there are any cases which
 * "The police and other partisans" This assumes that all of the police were partisans. Was this so? If it was, have we already been informed of it?
 * I meant other than the partisans who were rioting. I made an edit here which hopefully clarifies.
 * "Frischer responded with more appeals to the Czechoslovak authorities" Just checking that you don't mean 'Slovak authorities'.
 * Yes, he was located in Prague so he could appeal to the federal authorities.
 * "and insulted two of them" "insulted" or assaulted?
 * Insulted is correct.
 * Thanks so much! Your edits were really helpful. buidhe 09:59, 13 March 2020 (UTC)
 * , I was planning on taking a second run at this later today. Just checking as to whether you would still like me to, or whether the copy edit job is done so far as you are concerned? Gog the Mild (talk) 10:14, 13 March 2020 (UTC)
 * , That would be most appreciated! Thanks again. buidhe 10:24, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Right. That's me done. A really good article. I leave you with the thoughts below.

Gog the Mild (talk) 19:30, 13 March 2020 (UTC)
 * " national administrators" are repeatedly mentioned, including in the lead. I think that some explanation - if only a bracketed "managers" - is needed if a reader is to understand this. Although "their gains" makes me think that it was some sort of quasi-ownership[?]
 * Added footnote
 * "advocated for the rights of survivors" Possibly link to Holocaust survivors.
 * Done
 * Should most of the mentions of "partisans" be changed to 'former partisans'?
 * Done
 * "two grenades had been thrown into the Jewish community offices"; "when two grenades were thrown into Pavol Weiss' house, where three Jewish families lived, without causing injury" Did they explode?
 * It's not clear. The source only says that there were no injuries from this incident.
 * Thanks again for your edits, which have really helped this article. buidh<b style="color: White">e</b> 21:08, 13 March 2020 (UTC)