User talk:BatOfWisdom

I'm inquiring about the Soviet war crimes article.
hello. I am the author of the sentences you criticized in the Soviet war crimes article. If you point out the problematic sentences, I'll fix them. You mentioned that you don't know the author's intentions because the source is in Russian, but if you have questions about the intentions of the original source, I'd be happy to explain. I have a learning disorder (Disorder of written expression). So what I write is very awkward. Fysjsj2517 (talk) 18:56, 6 June 2024 (UTC)


 * Amazing! Thank you for reaching out. I only read and edited some minor grammar mistakes in the Russian Civil War section, leaving out the quoted sections, as I cannot know wether the mistakes are inherit to the quote, or to the translation.
 * In the first quote in the civil war section, "cut up", is used, which seems a strange phrase to use. Could be fine though.
 * In the quote by I. I. Zhukovsky-Zhuk, the grammar seems off. For a quote this is fine if the original was also imperfect.
 * In the section, Chita massacre and the elimination of the so-called "Semyonov jam", the word "somon" is used, which I cannot find a definition that suits the context. Also "gerillas" instead of guerillas.
 * I hope my changes in the paragraphs of the Amur River Massacre did not alter the meaning of the source.
 * In the first paragraph of the Nikolaevsk-on-Amur massacre section, an "ice drift" is referred to. What ice drift? It seems out of place. The following paragraph, second sentence, is it necessary to point out that wealthy civilians were also killed? Seems redundant. In the next sentence, it reads as if the red guerrillas are to this very day provoking the Japanese garrison; it should probably be in past tense, but I was reluctant to change it since I cannot verify anything. "The Japanese realized that they were dealing with a Red Army that did not recognize any agreements," It seems strange to refer to "A Red Army" instead of "The", but I may be wrong. In the next sentence, it is "an" ultimatum to disarm instead of "the", I do not think an is incorrect but I do prefer the in this context, as long as there aren't many ultimatums being tossed around at the time. Same paragraph, "in numbers." seems unecessary.
 * The entire last paragraph in the section reads poorly.
 * The whole article is massive, I do not have time today to go through any more sadly. Thank you again. Please ask if you have any questions. BatOfWisdom (talk) 13:28, 7 June 2024 (UTC)