Wikipedia:Peer review/Anne Frank/archive1

Anne Frank
Leading up to the 60th anniversary of her death, I think this article is a good one to try to raise to featured status. I have done a complete rewrite, and have sourced everthing I've written. One comment - I specifically tried to make the article biographical, and not a study of the diary, because I believe that if further discussion of the diary is required, it should be within its own article. (I don't think it's required though). I now hope that some new eyes will go over what I've written, and comment/edit appropriately. Rossrs 01:40, 14 Jan 2005 (UTC)


 * Please remove the bolded names. It is out of convention and looks ugly. Nichalp 20:07, Jan 15, 2005 (UTC)
 * I have removed them. I agree it looks better. thanks. Rossrs 02:22, 16 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Some more suggestions
 * The page size is 30kb. I would prefer to see some unnecessary text pruned so that the warning does not popup.
 * Consider putting a photo of Anne right on top instead of the statuette. If an image is not found, then put the diary's image.
 * The ToC is too long. Can you remove some headings?
 * Lastly, although I have not read the article in detail, I find that it lacks a definative flow; it seems more like a novel rather than an encyclopedia.

Nichalp 19:26, Jan 17, 2005 (UTC)
 * I appreciate that you took the time to look at this again, thanks. I have moved the diary image to the top & moved the statue picture further down. Works better that way, I agree. There will always be problems with photos - as far as I know public domain images of her are virtually nonexistent.
 * Now - not to start an argument, but I honestly disagree with everything else you've suggested. I disagree that 30kb is too long. Featured article Duran Duran (who will be well and truly forgotten many years before they're dead) is sitting at 43kb, so in terms of relative importance in world history, Anne Frank should be at least 900kb, but I'm not proposing it be stretched ;-)
 * Reducing the length of the article just for the sake of removing a warning message does not make sense to me either. It should only be done to improve the quality of the article.
 * Removing ToC headings is going to make individual sections longer. Note that Albert Einstein has 25 headings, Anne Frank has 15.  The viewer has the option of not selecting them. The appropriateness of headings as they appear within the article, should be more of a determining factor than the admittedly ugly ToC they create.
 * The other things I can't action because you haven't really given me anything to work with. The reason I put this on peer review was because after spending hours writing, rewriting, editing and reediting this, I was done with it.  To suggest I remove "unnecessary text" is not helpful or constructive, without giving some clue as to what you consider "unnecessary" because I've already gone through the process of editing to the best of my ability.  Also I just don't understand what you mean by "I find that it lacks a definative flow; it seems more like a novel rather than an encyclopedia."  You would need to explain what you mean.  To me the sequence is logical, and flows appropriately.  Comparing it to other biographical articles, which I have read through with considerable care, I can't see anything jarring that makes it more like a novel than an encyclopedia.  I don't think it's perfect or I wouldn't have listed it here, but I do think its style is at least equal to quite a few articles I've read here, and also better than some.   I'm not dismissing what you say, I've thought about what I could do to improve it, but your comments are vague and unactionable.  Rossrs 10:59, 18 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * have been thinking further about the ToC. Have gone back and reworked it to reduce it.  Now has 13 headings only, with no subheadings.  Another improvement. Rossrs 12:13, 18 Jan 2005 (UTC)


 * We are all here (PR) to improve on the quality of this encyclopedia rather than pick arguments with other editors ;). I know some reviewers really put you through the grind (I've gone through it unfortunately) so I only quoted from what I had to go through. I don't want to be "arguing" with you, so that why I aim to clarify my points here.
 * See the phrases She made her last diary entry on August 1, 1944. and The camp was liberated by British troops on April 15, 1945. The single sentence would seem to be a climax or anti-climax of some novel rather than a more subdued paragraph in an encyclopedia. The three line paragraphs also seem to have abrupt endings. (I'll try and paraphrase a few lines on the talk page)
 * "Unnecessary Text", that I would leave it to you as I haven't read the article in detail. You could also precis it, which would shorten the length of the article. I still would prefer a <30 kb page. You wouldn't have to to too much of a job on pruning text I assure you as it is marginally over the limit. If major clipping is needed you can move 'fate of Anne's friends' to a dedicated article. The heading is just an ancillary topic.
 * The first and the third image could also do with a more descriptive caption.
 * The Toc is now OK, definately an improvement. Its not only the topics in the ToC that count, its also the overall asthetics of the page that scores as a FA.

Nichalp 19:55, Jan 18, 2005 (UTC)
 * This is really good. I understand what you're saying now.  I've also had a look at what you've written on the talk page.  This is exactly the sort of clear advice I was hoping someone would provide, so thank you.  I'm not going to have a chance to look at this again for maybe a couple of days, but when I get time, I'll go back over it all.  thanks again. Rossrs 21:38, 18 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * I've gone back over it. Tried to make the style more uniformly encyclopedic. Moved "Trivia" to the talk page. It's still sitting at 30kb though.  I'd be interested to know if it's going in the right direction.  Rossrs 09:54, 23 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Much better, though I am hard pressed for time online to review it as I have prior commitments later this week. As of now I have no objections although it would be better on the eye if you could fragment a few long paragraphs. Also consider shortening the heading to "Fate of Anne's friends". Nichalp 18:46, Jan 23, 2005 (UTC)


 * Wow! Fantastic article! However, could we please state for the record which holocaust deniers say that Anne Frank did not write the book? A reference to that would be good.

Also:
 * The Soviet writer Ilya Ehrenburg later said of her: "one voice speaks for six million - the voice not of a sage or a poet but of an ordinary little girl" - source? (Add to references)
 * "As Anne Frank's stature as both a writer and humanist has been elevated over time, leaders such as Nelson Mandela and Elie Wiesel have noted her importance as a symbol of the Holocaust and more broadly as a representative of persecution in general." Source? Again add to references.
 * "Commenting on Frank's particular writing style, dramatist Meyer Levin praised it for "sustaining the tension of a well-constructed novel",


 * while the poet John Berryman wrote that it was a unique depiction, not merely of adolescence, but of "the mysterious, fundamental process of a child becoming an adult as it is actually happening"."
 * You note that the Netherlands Institute for War Documentation conducted a forensic study of the book. Could we please add teh source of this to the references section?
 * Anyway, great job and almost ready for FAC! - Ta bu shi da yu 16:26, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * thanks for looking at this, and for the positive feedback, which I appreciate. I've now rewritten the "Criticism and authentication section".
 * Have sourced Ilya Ehrenburg, John Berryman, and Meyer Levin. Could not source the Elie Wiesel comment, so removed it, replaced it with a Hillary Rodham Clinton quote which I have sourced, also expanded and sourced the Nelson Mandela remark.  Holocaust deniers - I found a couple of names of people sued in "Roses from the Earth" which I already had listed as source.  Also a quote and a bit more on that topic regarding David Irving, which I have sourced.  In terms of naming and sourcing the deniers, that's the best I've been able to come up with.  Do you think it suffices?  Finally, the bit about the Netherlands Institute for War Documentation's forensic study - is from "Roses from the Earth".   I'm not sure with quoting sources, how to do it.  ie.  The bit about the forensics comes from the book, I've listed it in the source references, but how is anyone to know?  If you get the opportunity, would appreciate your comment in view of the changes I've made.  thanks again..  Rossrs 09:26, 30 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Heya, I think the changes are very good. May I make the suggestion that you move this to FAC? If you do, let me know so I can archive this... - Ta bu shi da yu 02:50, 3 Feb 2005 (UTC)