Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Betsy Bakker-Nort/archive1

Betsy Bakker-Nort

 * Nominator(s): Edwininlondon (talk) 18:05, 6 July 2022 (UTC)

Following the successful nomination of post-war Dutch parliamentarian Corry Tendeloo a few months ago, I started the article about her pre-war predecessor, another women's rights fighter largely forgotten these days. Thanks to the thorough reviews of Johannes Schade at GA and SusunW at PR the article is in much better shape than I could manage. Yet no doubt more improvements are needed, which I look forward to hear about. Edwininlondon (talk) 18:05, 6 July 2022 (UTC)

Image review

 * File:Betsy-Bakker-Nort-1922-by-AS-Weinberg.jpg does not appear to be PD-US, unless there is a known publication before 1927
 * I did a bit of research. Photo taken in 1922 by portrait photographer A.S. Weinberg according to . I can't find anything about it being published anywhere. The site hosting it says it is in the public domain. The site's owner, Atria, is an institute that is a descendant of the International Archives for the Women's Movement. Since starting in 1935, they received many personal archives including Betsy Bakker Nort's, according to . It is likely that this photo was never published until Atria did so on their website. The site hosts other Bakker-Nort images, and lists some of those as in Copyright, see for example . So they seem to follow the rules. None of the digitized 1920s, 1930s, 1940s newspaper articles on delpher.nl that mention Bakker-Nort feature this photo. So I made the change and tagged it PD-US-unpublished, is that correct? I also added the info I gathered to the file on Commons.
 * That seems reasonable Buidhe public (talk) 22:54, 11 July 2022 (UTC)


 * File:Group photo International Woman Suffrage Alliance June 1908 in Amsterdam.jpg A publication before 1927 is probably needed to make it PD-US, unless it was out of copyright in NL on 1 January 1996
 * Given that it was an event in 1908, it very likely was published somewhere soon after that event, although I have not found a specific publication.
 * Its usually not sfficient to rely on speculation that it was published at a specific time Buidhe public (talk) 22:54, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
 * I have checked the newspaper archives for the June 1908 event, as well as the monthly magazines for the relevant topic in that year (see ). I could not find this photo published. According to this researcher here , the photographer was hired by the organisation to document the event. I expected to find the photo in the report of the event, which according to this newspaper report came in July 1908. Google Books does not allow a preview, but it does allow a search inside the report, . None of the relevant keywords produce a result that suggests this photo is in this report. The photographer died in 1947 according to . Like the lead photo Betsy-Bakker-Nort-1922-by-AS-Weinberg.jpg, this photo comes from the Atria institute, probably donated by one of the event organisers to the International Archives for the Women's Movement in the 1930s; Atria have shared it with the EU run Europeana.eu; both list this photo as in the Public Domain. It is likely this photo was never published. Shall I change its license to PD-US-unpublished?


 * File:Peace Palace in the Hague in 1922.jpg Need to know publication date and/or author's death date to determine copyright status
 * It doesn't mention a name, just Agence Rol. Agence photographique. The site, run by the European Union, lists this item as No Copyright, with a link to . My best guess, given that it is made by a press agency and the file has 1922 in its name, is that it was published in 1922 in France. Can we keep it?

(t &#183; c)  buidhe  03:29, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you for taking the time to review this. Edwininlondon (talk) 19:01, 7 July 2022 (UTC)

Support from Gog the Mild
Recusing to reserve a spot. Poke me if it slips my mind. Gog the Mild (talk) 21:25, 6 July 2022 (UTC)


 * The image for the Reichstag fire seems disproportionately large.
 * I have cropped it a bit
 * The image is still the same size.
 * I cropped it even further, made it the current version, but I too do not see the new version appear on the page yet. Perhaps the image is cached somewhere for some time. I'll check again in the morning.


 * Cite 75 has a p/pp error.
 * "she received enough votes to be elected". I suspect readers will understand how elections work; perhaps 'she was elected'?
 * "After the German invasion in May 1940". Could you specify which one, and the link is Easter eggy.
 * "Bakker-Nort did not return to the House." What and/or where is "the House"?
 * Why "concentration camp Theresienstadt" rather than 'Theresienstadt concentration camp'? Also in the article.


 * "Bakker-Nort had successfully accomplished the task of leading the women's movement Jacobs had given her." Suggest → 'Bakker-Nort had successfully accomplished the task Jacobs had given her: of leading the women's movement.'
 * "Historian Marianne Braun" to 'The historian Marianne Braun' to avoid false title.
 * "when a corresponding law". What is a "corresponding law"? And/or, what does it correspond to?
 * "legally incapacitated and denied them any say over their own children and property needed to be reformed." → 'legally incapacitated, denied them any say over their own children and property needed to be reformed.'
 * "a more conservative group". "more conservative" that what/who?


 * "two female board members on the board of the VDB". Can "board" twice in five words be avoided?
 * "The VDB retained its five seats". It would be helpful if at some point a reader could be told the total number of seats.
 * "slowly taking up more feminist's viewpoints". Why the 's?
 * "which since the 1929 election had two female members of parliament, with van Itallie-Van Embden joining Bakker-Nort". This fits clumsily inside a sentence on a different topic. Could it be given a sentence of its own?
 * "wearing their national flags". How does one wear a flag?
 * "The Hague Convention resulted in little progress". On anything? Or just on women's rights? If the latter, say so.
 * On anything. No agreements were reached on the other topics (territorial waters nor foreign property).


 * "Bakker-Nort continued to fight for the right of a married woman to choose to keep her own nationality, but during her whole time in parliament she was a lone voice." Could you confirm that VDB policy was opposed to this position?
 * I can not. The source says she was the only one raising the issue. I imagine the others thought the same but let her do the talking. Is "lone voice" not a good description of this? Is it better to just remove it?
 * I can just about live with it, but if it were me I would remove it. If you can think of a more nuanced way of putting it that would be good.
 * I removed it


 * "to remove any restrictions for women to be appointed notary". This seems a little convoluted. Perhaps 'to remove any restrictions on women being appointed notaries' or similar?
 * "had most recently tried in 1927". Tried what? To argue for? If you mean tried to introduce a bill, say so. If you mean succeeded in introducing a bill but it had failed to become law, say so.
 * removed altogether to simplify


 * "and had most recently tried in 1927, but was voted down again" Voted down again in 1927, 1927, or both?
 * removed altogether to simplify


 * "the Nazis were the instigators of the fire." Can one instigate a fire? "to incite; to bring about by urging or encouraging".
 * "She urged people to value the freedom and justice that democracy provided and to fight all who aimed to curtail them/" I assume this was directed at the German government. If so, could this be made clear?
 * Possibly but that would be speculation. The source only says she spoke at a meeting in Amsterdam. Perhaps "She urged the Dutch people to .."?
 * That would be fine.


 * "She had tried to at least put a time limit of five years on the law". I don't understand. Five years before it came into effect? Five years before currently employed women were fired? Something else?
 * Time limit as in how long the law would apply for. I rephrased it to make clear her amendment was about making it temporary


 * "which banned Aryans from marrying Jews". I think Aryans needs explaining in line per MOS:LINK "Do not unnecessarily make a reader chase links: if a highly technical term can be simply explained with very few words, do so."
 * I did but please check
 * Excellent.


 * "They were spurred on by the activities of for instance the VVGS". Suggest either deleting "for instance" or specifying the wider group which the VVGS is exemplifying.
 * "The late 1930s saw a rise in antisemitism in the Netherlands, once many Jews fled Germany." This seems to say that antisemitism increased in the Netherlands because Jews were leaving Germany. Does the source support that? (I fail to see the connection.)
 * Yes, 30,000 Jewish refugees came across the border, which was a relatively big group compared to size of Dutch Jews population. However, rather than trying to explain all this, I have dropped the second part.
 * Ah. (You could have added "to the Netherlands" to the end of the sentence.


 * "it condoning the Nazis' actions." What actions?
 * elaborated a bit more, linking to Kristallnacht


 * "the next election, leaving it to the next generation." "... next ... next ..."
 * "the bill for punishment on treason and espionage." Should "on" → 'of'?
 * "The next day the Nazis invaded the Netherlands." 1. "the Nazis" → 'Germany'. 2. Could we have a link to German invasion of the Netherlands in there.
 * "the occupiers dissolved parliament". Could it be stated that the Netherlands was defeated and occupied. Perhaps giving the date of the end of the fighting and/or the start of the occupation.
 * Lead: "during her time in the chamber mainly argued the case for more women's rights with respect to marriage law and labour law"; article: "Bakker-Nort had spent 18 years in the House, addressing parliament mainly on the issues of justice, education and labour". The lead should be a summary of the article, but they don't seem to match.
 * Not literally indeed, but in the lead we have the specific topics that come up time and again in the body of the article. This sentence here in the body is wider in scope, but I suspect it is more useful for the reader if the specific topics are in the lead. Happy to change if you disagree.
 * Ho hum. I see your case, so your choice. Leave as is if you wish.


 * "As the Nazi occupiers". "Nazi" → 'German'. Check other uses of Nazi as well please.
 * Is there a reason why Nazi should not be used? It seems to me it is quite common to use Nazis and Germany interchangably.
 * And a thoroughly bad habit it is too. (IMO. (In an encyclopedia article.)) One would not write "The demorats liberated Paris" or "The communists were victorious at Stalingrad". The ideology of a nation's government should not be used as a shorthand for the name of the country. (IMO. In an encyclopedia article.)
 * I see your point. I have replaced Nazis with Germans in quite a few places, particularly where it involves them invading or occupying or anthing international. However, there are a few cases with the Reichstagbrand and internal aggression towards German jews where I feel Nazis is more appropriate.
 * Yep. That's fine.


 * "She never had belonged" → 'She had never belonged'.
 * "She was single since 1939 when her husband had died." → 'She had been single since 1939 when her husband died.' And why is this mentioned out of chronological order?
 * I tried to find a good place for it in chronological order but it kind of breaks the flow of the 1937–1940 section. So I removed it altogether.
 * I think it too important to remove. I have reinserted it, but feel free to move or rephrase. (Obviously!) Or to come back for any further discussion.


 * "accepted an offer to resign taking their pension." → 'accepted an offer to resign and take their pension.'


 * "Bakker-Nort was found alive at the camp in June 1945". Is it known by who, or in what circumstances or why this was a month after the end of the war?
 * I added a litle bit of what is known but nothing known about the circumstances.


 * "of which Bakker-Nort was one of the most prominent." "which" → 'whom'.
 * "The newly acquired right to study quickly became normal". I assume you mean ''at university'?
 * "At some point in the 1930s, she had donated her documents to the International Archives for the Women's Movement in Amsterdam, which also housed personal documents of, among others, Jacobs and Rosa Manus, as well as documents of women's organizations and journal issues." A long sentence. Suggest breaking at "Amsterdam, which".
 * "In 1992, the feminists' materials were identified in the Russian Military State Archives and recorded on microfilm, and 10 years later returned to the International Archives of the Women's Movement." Did this have any effect on academic interest in Bakker-Nort or on the publication of works about her?
 * Not as far as I can see. There is no extensive biography. Yet.
 * Hmm. If access to this mass of material 20 years ago has really led to no academic follow up, perhaps that could be noted? Possibly adding that women's stories have been generally lost because they weren't a focus of academia and that lack of archival records and digitization has contributed to this? I am pinging in as they covered similar issues in the last section of their FA Inter-Allied Women's Conference. Gog the Mild (talk) 13:43, 16 July 2022 (UTC)

Gog the Mild (talk) 21:42, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Absolutely agree that lack of academic focus and records upon which they could have relied (but chose not to) had a huge effect on women's stories being lost. Perhaps This source will help. Look specifically at pp 496 re Rosemary Foot's observation and 497 the impact of a lack of women's archives. SusunW (talk) 13:52, 16 July 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for your detailed review. I believe I have addressed all your points. There are a number of cases where I have explained something or asked you a question, see above. Edwininlondon (talk) 06:30, 16 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Good stuff. Thank you. A handful of come backs above. Gog the Mild (talk) 12:36, 16 July 2022 (UTC)
 * I think I have them addressed but do check. If the image problem persists I'd love some guidance. Thx, Edwininlondon (talk) 14:00, 16 July 2022 (UTC)
 * I am still twitchy about the academic interest issue, which I have recently expanded on, and which Susun has chipped in on, but I think that FAC is met as it is so am supporting. Gog the Mild (talk) 14:46, 16 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your comments and suggestions, and your support. I agree it would be good to say something about the archives and scholarly research, but I struggle to find something that pertains to Bakker-Nort. While insightful, SusunW's references are quite remote from the IAV archives and Bakker-Nort. Ideally I find a source that says "while some scholars have used the recovered archives to write about Aletta Jacobs and Rosa Manus, none have published (yet) about Bakker-Nort". But there is no such thing I can find. I have found evidence of the archives being used to write about Jacobs (see ) and Rosa Manus (see ). Edwininlondon (talk) 06:57, 20 July 2022 (UTC)
 * The source shows that lack of archives or access to them impacts both the way history is presented and whether women's stories can be uncovered. While not directly about Bakker-Nort, it in general applies to every historic woman. IMO there is no possible way that the stolen archives could not have impacted her story being told. Had there been access during the push to create women's studies courses (1970-1990), there is no doubt in my mind that she would already have a full blown biography because she ties into too many other critical Dutch feminists. But, it happened like it happened. I do see your point Edwininlondon, but as long as you aren't drawing a conclusion, I think you have enough. You can make the general statement "A lack of archives or access to them..." and follow it with "For example, the retrieval of the IAV records led to new biographies on Jacobs and Manus". But, its your call. SusunW (talk) 13:22, 20 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you. I'm happy to add this: "A lack of archives or access to them impacts both the way history is presented and whether women's stories can be uncovered. For example, the retrieval of the IAV records led to new biographies on Jacobs and Manus." But I'm not finding the exact source for this first sentence. Nothing on pages 496, 497 or even further on in Glenda Sluga's article quite cover it I think. Is there something else? Edwininlondon (talk) 11:59, 22 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Sluga discusses the paucity of women's presence in national archives (but wealth in feminist records) and lack of scholarship on women 500-501, but in this case, perhaps this is helpful, which specifically talks about the IAV. 27 talks about how lack of materials make it difficult to include women in the historic records, 29 talks about how the records were used to counter government assertions about women, 39 talks about importance of archives in generating scholarship, and 41 talks about how the lack of records leads to invisibility. Hope that helps. SusunW (talk) 13:02, 22 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Splendid, thank you. I've added the 2 lines and sources. Edwininlondon (talk) 08:48, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

Support from SusunW
I'm putting a placeholder here and will review it in the next couple of days. SusunW (talk) 22:18, 6 July 2022 (UTC) As I already reviewed the text at the peer review, a read-through since the changes were made indicates to me topic is well presented and comprehensive, with no major issues. It's a support from me. SusunW (talk) 14:44, 7 July 2022 (UTC)

Source review
I'll take a shot at the refs here. All references appear to be from RS and a spot check during the peer review revealed no overt issues with close paraphrasing, OR, or mis-cited pages, etc. Formatting issues are noted below, but overall conforms with MOS, in my opinion, though were it me, I would list issn and oclc for any journal articles that had such identifiers as it makes it easier for people abroad to locate and/or request materials in my experience. version reviewed: That's it from me. Overall, very thankful you wrote the article on her. Well done. SusunW (talk) 14:44, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Bundle the four refs after the 2nd sentence of death and legacy section.
 * Betsy Bakker-Nort – biography 1st ref, should be Biography
 * ref 54 fire should be capitalized
 * ref 56 title should be in title case
 * ref 77 goes to the search page, rather than a direct link to the article
 * ref 78 again goes to a search page, rather than any article and I see nothing titled "Bakker-Nort". Perhaps a better way to avoid OR would be to state "While the national newspaper Het Dagblad published only a short notice of her death…" and remove the citation to the search page.
 * Braun, after the : "The" should be capitalized
 * de Haan's title shows "iav/iiav's" which should be IAV/IIAV's as these are acronyms/abbreviations for organizations.
 * de Wilde is missing location, i.e. Assen and both "is" and "years" in the translations should be capitalized.
 * In Gijsenbergh looks like there is a stray . after Cham (as in Cham, Switzerland)
 * Posthumus-van der Goot is missing location, i.e. Utrecht; according to worldcat this was the 3rd revised edition, and oclc is 258044133, which should be added
 * Presser: English translation should be in title case and “the” Hague should be capitalized.
 * Thank you very much for this detailed review. I believe I have addressed all your points. Edwininlondon (talk) 07:09, 8 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Looks fine to me now SusunW (talk) 18:34, 9 July 2022 (UTC)

Support from BennyOnTheLoose
Happy to be challenged on any of my comments, expecially about prose, where I make no claims of expertise. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 16:46, 7 July 2022 (UTC)


 * Could a cropped version of the infobox image be used, with reduced white space around the subject?
 * Done

Early activism
 * "She was the 14th woman to enrol at the University of Groningen. In 1871, Jacobs had been the first.[14] She finished her studies four years" - maybe subsitiute the name for the second "she"?
 * Done. Also realised the year is a bit ambiguous, so rephrased that as well


 * "She finished her studies four years later" maybe amend to something like "...finished her degree..." or "completed her degree", as she later went on to complete a doctorate?
 * Done


 * "Bakker-Nort was the first female to earn a doctorate in law" - should this be "...the first woman..."?
 * Done


 * "...Bakker-Nort started to work as a lawyer and attorney in Groningen, which she would do until 1930, when the couple moved to the Hague, where she continued her legal work..." - when I first read this I expected there to be an interruption in her legal work, rather than just a change of location. If sources tell us that she did continue in the same line of work without a significnt gap, consider rewording.
 * Done


 * "among the first wave feminists" - it's not clear to me from this (without clicking the wikilink) whether Bakker-Nort was amongst those first wave feminists or not. Maybe state it, if she was, or add a few words about the first wave?
 * Done. Changed the first sentence of the section, to make her part of the 1st wave


 * "active suffrage" - I was unaware that this means the right to vote. It may be clear enough from the previous sentance what the term means, but just have a look again.
 * Done. Added links for both active and passive in previous sentence


 * The article has "Vereeniging voor Vrouwenkiesrecht (VVVK)" and "Association of Women Citizens (VVS)" & "Association of Women with Higher Education [nl] (VVAO)" - slight inconsistency, which I guess arises form there being a wikilink to VVVK and not the others. Shouldn't VVVK also have a translated title?
 * Done. I'll make the red link go blue one day soon. I think it is notable.

Political Career
 * "By 1918, Bakker-Nort was on the board of the VDB, one of two female board members, Mien van Itallie-Van Embden being the other" - maybe "By 1918, Bakker-Nort was one of two female board members on the board of the VDB, Mien van Itallie-Van Embden being the other"?
 * Done


 * "with the majority of the House being members of Christian parties, her arguments to stop the bill failed" - maybe add something like "and opposed this", as them being members of Christian parties was not the direct cause.
 * Done

Death and legacy
 * " reduce the rights of women based on the Bible," - I haven't read the source, but shouldn't this be something like "..based on their interpretation of the Bible,"?
 * Done


 * "She had donated, at some point in the 1930s," - maybe "At some point in the 1930s, she had donated"?
 * Done


 * "they moved all stolen materials to Moscow" - is it "all of these stolen materials"? Again, I've not looked at the source.
 * Done

Lead
 * I wonder if a little could be added to summarise more of the legacy part of the article?
 * What do you think is best? Something like "According to VDB chairman Pieter Oud, Bakker-Nort had successfully accomplished the task of leading the women's movement Jacobs had given her."
 * That's fine. You could, optionally, consider adding summary of some comments by Braun too. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 19:40, 17 July 2022 (UTC)

Great work, (and GA/PR reviewers). I've got a few questions and comments above. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 09:33, 8 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you. Hopefully I have addressed your points. Edwininlondon (talk) 17:32, 9 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Yes, thanks. Happy to support. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 19:40, 17 July 2022 (UTC)

Comments by Z1720
I have written historical biographies, but am unfamiliar with this person or their work.


 * "had made a name for herself as the first female student at a Dutch university," I think this can be shortened to "was the first female student at a Dutch university,"
 * "Together they went from town to town to make the case for women's rights in speeches." -> "Together they went from town to town to adcovate for women's rights in speeches."
 * "that this early work already showed her calm and determined approach and social-liberal orientation." Delete already as unnecessary
 * "In 1871, Jacobs had been the first." This is already mentioned earlier in the article so this can be removed.
 * "This meant, for instance, that married women could not" Delete "for instance" as unnecessary
 * "Getting the vote, however, was important not only in order to make progress on women's issues, she said; it was a fundamental right for women to have a say in all matters." I don't know about this phrasing and punctuation, as I originally thought everything after the semi-colon was a quote. Maybe: "She said that getting the vote was important to make progress on women's issues and that it was a fundamental right for women to have a say in all matters."
 * "outlining what a modern marriage law should look like and " -> "outlining provisions she thought should be included in a modern marriage law" to express that she is sharing her opinion on the marriage law.
 * "and wrote in a column in its monthly magazine that the old laws which made married women legally incapacitated, denied them any say over their own children and property needed to be reformed." -> "and wrote in a column in its monthly magazine that the old laws, which made married women legally incapacitated, denied them any say over their children and property and thus needed to be reformed." Added a comma, removed "own" and added "and thus".
 * "but decided to play a waiting game and not to revoke the agreement." -> "but decided to not revoke the agreement." waiting game is going a little to far into MOS:IDIOM in my opinion, and I don't think deciding to wait is a necessary addition to this sentence.
 * "Her successor Tendeloo was instrumental in ending married women's incompetency to act and the mandatory dismissal of female civil servants once they married." I am not sure how this connects to Bakker-Nort. Maybe a comment in this sentence about how it built upon Bakker-Nort's work, or delete it altogether.
 * I see your point. I have removed the 2nd bit about the dismissal. Since the text repeatedly refers how Bakker-Nort tried to end the incompetency to act, I think the connection is clear now; it was the dismissal bit that came out of nowhere.
 * While not necessary for my support, I suggest that the "Sources" section be divided into two columns so that a reader does not have to scroll as much to compare sources.

Those are my thoughts. Please ping me when the above are addressed. Z1720 (talk) 16:27, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you for taking the time to review and your helpful comments. I believe I have addressed them all. Edwininlondon (talk) 15:42, 4 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Support. My concerns are resolved. Z1720 (talk) 19:39, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

Hog Farm Talk 23:33, 10 August 2022 (UTC)