Talk:Soviet economic blockade of Lithuania/GA1

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

Reviewer: NoonIcarus (talk · contribs) 15:04, 20 June 2021 (UTC)

Lead

 * The lead should be expanded to summarize better the article, including the reasons of the blockade, its effects and its resolution ✅

Background

 * The section's first paragraph needs a reference ✅

Events

 * Economic pressure was soon complemented by the military pressure, including the violence and assaults by the Soviet troops - This sentence might be a little vague. The closest statement that I found in the source was As the economic noose tightened around Lithuania, a violent incident in the center of Vilnius served as a reminder of the Soviet Union's military presence. According to accounts by witnesses, about 50 Soviet soldiers broke into the city's main printing plant this afternoon, beating up a dozen workers who tried to resist.. This might need to be rephrased to reflect faithful the details of the violence and its extent (namely if it was this single incident or if there were further assaults). ✅
 * To it whom be of interest, see sections in the second reference such as "Occupations of Buildings Carried Out by USSR Soldiers in March–April, 1990" for more details.


 * Meanwhile, during the month of April, the then Prime Minister of Lithuania Kazimira Prunskienė visited Oslo, Copenhagen, Stockholm and Ottawa, seeking economic and political support. - I wasn't able to verify this information in either of the two sources. ✅
 * On 17 May, Kazimira Prunskienė met with Gorbachev. Nevertheless, the Soviet leader still demanded immediate revocation or suspension of the Lithuanian independence restoration. - The sentences are unsourced. ✅
 * but managed to establish good contacts with Denmark - The phrasing might be a little odd, and another one might be considered, such as "a good relationship". ✅

Aftermatch

 * The paragraph is unsourced. ✅

Comments

 * Overall, with the exception of the aforementioned comments, the article is well referenced. It also appears to not have copyvio issues and has an illustrative image with a free license. Once these issues are resolved, it should meet the GA criteria. I will include maintenance tags to reflect these recommendations. --NoonIcarus (talk) 15:05, 20 June 2021 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the review. I think I addressed each point, adding more references and/or rephrasing where appropriate. The lead section is now expanded to have a brief summary. Let me know if you have any further comments. --Mindaur (talk) 16:44, 24 June 2021 (UTC)


 * I'm the one that needs to thank you both for the nomination and for the expeditious corrections. All the issues seem to have been addressed.
 * I have a last question that I didn't notice until now, sorry for not making it earlier: I have noticed that Latvia and Estonia are included in the article's infobox as supporters of Lithuania; while I can see this reasonable as a reader unfamiliar with the topic since both declared independence as well, the support isn't state explicitly in the article. Do you believe you could go into further detail about the support and how it was expressed? If it is possible, I think it would be an important improvement to the article. --NoonIcarus (talk) 23:35, 24 June 2021 (UTC)


 * No worries. The origins of Baltic support/unity is in the pre-history of the Baltic Assembly, when the "Declaration on Unity and Cooperation by the Republic of Estonia, Republic of Latvia and Republic of Lithuania" was signed on 12 May 1990 (in the middle of the blockade): . I added a different reference next to the "Supported by" which more explicitly links this declaration with the context of blockade (it's in Lithuanian, but has a summary page in English). --Mindaur (talk) 11:35, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

Passing
Excellent. With these changes in sourcing and prose, the article should be ready to go. Congratulations! This has been such an interesting read. --NoonIcarus (talk) 10:54, 26 June 2021 (UTC)