Talk:Adolf Hitler's 50th birthday/GA1

GA Review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Calvin999 (talk · contribs) 10:59, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks man for taking on the review. :) Jonas Vinther • (speak to me!) 11:11, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Lead

Adolf Hitler's 50th birthday, on 20 April 1939, was celebrated → The 50th birthday of Adolf Hitler on 20 April 1939 was celebrated

Done. Jonas Vinther • (speak to me!) 13:55, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Does Germany use the American of British format of dates? I'd have thought it would be British, and not the American you've used.

No, Germany uses the same date format as Denmark, and that is not like any English ones. However, this article is written in British-English, but the confusion is my fault as I neglected to post a British-English template on the talk page. Will do so, cheers. Jonas Vinther • (speak to me!) 13:55, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

and other parts of the world. → Such as?

Australia, the image File:Hitler's 50th birthday in Australia.jpeg demonstrates that, and the Free City of Danzig as stated later in the article. Jonas Vinther • (speak to me!) 13:55, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

congratulations flew in from all over → The phrase "flew in" is too conversational and informal

Changed. Jonas Vinther • (speak to me!) 13:55, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps link 'allied countries'?

You're quite right, done. Jonas Vinther • (speak to me!) 13:55, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

As you go on to mention the Western Allies, I think you should use axis countries in the previous point.

Correct, done. Jonas Vinther • (speak to me!) 13:55, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Link Führer

Done. Jonas Vinther • (speak to me!) 13:55, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Link Third Reich

Done. Jonas Vinther • (speak to me!) 13:55, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The lead feels a bit short to be honest. Another sentence or two could do with being added.

Done. Jonas Vinther • (speak to me!) 13:55, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Celebrations

Link Nazi Germany

Done. Jonas Vinther • (speak to me!) 13:55, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

the government of Nazi Germany declared 20 April, the birthday of their Führer, a national holiday. → the government of Nazi Germany declared that Führer Adolf Hitler's birthday (20 April), be a national holiday.

Strikes me a matter of opinion, but changed. Jonas Vinther • (speak to me!) 13:55, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Having three clauses was just a bit clunky. Sometimes it's better to just say things as simply as possible. — ₳aron 17:33, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Need a citation at the end of this sentence

Added Kershaw 2000. Jonas Vinther • (speak to me!) 13:55, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Link municipalities

Done. Jonas Vinther • (speak to me!) 13:55, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Link Berlin

Done. Jonas Vinther • (speak to me!) 13:55, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Festivities began in the afternoon on the day before, → Festivities began in the afternoon on the day before his birthday,
Nazi Empire → Was it an Empire?

No, it's merely a phrase used to describe the Nazi era. Jonas Vinther • (speak to me!) 13:55, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

the taciturn Speer → What is a taciturn?

It means: "dour, stern, and silent in expression and manner". Jonas Vinther • (speak to me!) 13:55, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

My point is that a lot of people won't know what this word means, therefore the sentence won't make sense. — ₳aron 17:33, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

deputations → What is a deputation?

It means "the act of appointing a person or persons to represent or act for another or others". Jonas Vinther • (speak to me!) 13:55, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Same as previous points. I'd use more commonly known synonyms. — ₳aron 17:33, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The block box quote doesn't work here. There isn't enough prose in this article for it to be absorbed into and not look clunky and boxy. The pictures also interfere with it.

Okay, have removed the box. Jonas Vinther • (speak to me!) 13:55, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Military parade

Central to the celebrations on the birthday itself was a huge show of the military capabilities of Nazi Germany. → A key part of the birthday celebrations was the large demonstration of Nazi Germany's military capabilities.

Changed. Jonas Vinther • (speak to me!) 13:55, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The block box quote is okay here.

Wunderbar. :) Jonas Vinther • (speak to me!) 14:12, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Joseph Goebbels, the event's organizer,[9] declared in a broadcast address to the German people: → Tack this onto the end of the first paragraph, not need for a one sentence stand alone line.

Done. Jonas Vinther • (speak to me!) 13:55, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Apply the same to the three "paragraphs" after the box block quote. That can be just one paragraph instead of three small bits.

Done. Jonas Vinther • (speak to me!) 13:55, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

chargé d'affaires → What is this?

It means "an envoy to a state to which a diplomat of higher grade is not sent". Jonas Vinther • (speak to me!) 13:55, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps link it — ₳aron 17:33, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

congratulation to Hitler; due to → congratulations to Hitler, but due to

Changed. Jonas Vinther • (speak to me!) 13:55, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

References - Sources

Why have you structured it like this? It should use the standard way of formatting citations like this.

No, it doesn't have to structured like that. Using Harv references is perfectly acceptable, see Adolf Hitler#Sources#Online. Jonas Vinther • (speak to me!) 13:55, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I've noticed that History articles tend to use this actually. I'm a Music editor mainly. — ₳aron 17:33, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The following are what you need to change them do (you haven't used italics for most that should be and you have used incorrect names)

→ Pittsburgh Press
→ Life
→ Time
→ Daily Mail
→ San Jose Mercury News
→ Evening Independent
→ The Miami News
→ The Jerusalem Post
→ The Hour
→ Der Tagesspiegel
→ The Age
Several (like Daily Mail) are missing the author name

That's the way it is when citing Daily Mail, not exactly an error. Jonas Vinther • (speak to me!) 13:55, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Some now don't have a work/publisher parameter at all now. — ₳aron 17:33, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

They are all missing dates of publication (some may not be available, but some do have them)

Will add the ones who list publication dates. Jonas Vinther • (speak to me!) 13:55, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Outcome

I won't fail the article, because it's fairly short and you can sort our these issues quickly, but especially in the references there are multiple basic errors. And there are issues with not placing citations at the end of every sentence for verifiability of information. On hold for 7 days. Ping me or talkback me when needed. — ₳aron 12:03, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Calvin999, thanks a bunch for your thorough review. I've responded to all your comments and made changes accordingly. Cheers, Jonas Vinther • (speak to me!) 14:11, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Calvin999, good job in spotting those errors in the online source section. I've fixed all and made some other minor changes per your new comments. Cheers, Jonas Vinther • (speak to me!) 18:06, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I've linked Hitler for you in the lead. But those two words still need changing to something more commonly known. I've never seen those words before and it meant that I didn't understand the sentence because of it. — ₳aron 08:53, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Calvin999, You're quite right. I've made the final changes. Cheers, Jonas Vinther • (speak to me!) 17:27, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for addressing everything. Passing. — ₳aron 15:47, 29 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Military Parade: 12 companies of Heer/Luftwaffe/Kriegsmarine ?

What does "company" mean in that context ? A company in the common military sense would have counted around 100 to 200, at maximum 250 men. (12 such companies would haved formed, roughly, no more than a single regiment). --129.187.244.19 (talk) 12:54, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

and, btw, that sounds as if there where one third for each armed forces branch (i. e.: parity), which would have given a somewhat very distorted picture of the overall force relations. --129.187.244.19 (talk) 12:56, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]