Talk:Anti-tobacco movement in Nazi Germany/GA1

This is an archive of a previous GA nomination. The results of the nomination were that the article has passed the Good article criteria. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you disagree with this article's review, the article can be nominated for Good article reassessment.

GA Review

GA first impressions

Lead:

this is very short (see Wikipedia:Lead) for guidance. Also at some point in the lead give the full proper title to Nazi Germany. Nationalist etc.
...Anti-tobacco movements grew in many nations from the beginning of the 20th century,... can this be referenced it is quite an important statement, which also enhances the difference in Germany at that time.
...the most important research on smoking and its effects on health was conducted in the Third Reich... why in the third reich and not by the third Reich.
An image top right would follow accepted layout for articles.

Prelude to Nazi anti-tobacco campaign

the whole section is totally reliant on Proctor for reference, not the B.M.A. article which is accessible on the web but a book the text of which is not. Are there any other references which will support this section.

Image:

"The chain-smoker" saying "He does not eat it [the cigarette], it eats him" What is gained from [ ]a wiki format for external web pages rather than ( ) bracketing the cigarette

Image: production of cigarette. the text is far too long, crosses into another section and is a paragraph in itsellf. Can this be edited / some of the text placed in a reference / some of the text placed in the article.

Wikipedia:Manual of Style (numbers) mentions when numbers weights etc are used, the format is (for example) 000 tons

An interesting story that I knew nothing about. I look forward to reading this article again shortly. These are first impressions, I will go through the article more closely in the next day or so. Edmund Patrick – confer 18:02, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Lead

Short lead- I have expanded the lead. Done
Reference for the statement Anti-tobacco movements grew in many nations from the beginning of the 20th century - the reference for this is Richard Doll, Uncovering the effects of smoking: historical perspective, reference number 3.
the most important research on smoking and its effects on health was conducted in the Third Reich - actually I used in as general. For example it is said military research in the United States rather than military research by the United States.
image top right - I have moved one image to the lead. Done

Prelude to Nazi anti-tobacco campaign Actually Proctor describes it carefully, but I did not find any other reference other than Proctor. Actually very few people have studied on this subject.

Image

Bracket: Changed the bracket style. Done
Caption: I have shortened the caption. Done

Number - changed the style. Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 04:57, 14 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GA first review

I have yet to find major fault when comparing the article to the good article criteria, except maybe for the occasional prose / use of /or the order of words. For example ...Smoking was outlawed in schools also... change to ...Smoking was also outlawed in schools ... If you are happy with a change like this I am quite prepared to go through the article in one go, you could always (undo)! The thoughts below are that, from a new reader to the subject.

Hitler's attitude towards smoking, why is this the second section of the article. I know that he is relevant to the history of this subject, but should we cover the subject first, then bring him in. It is mentioned that ...Hitler's personal distaste for tobacco was not the main cause behind Nazi anti-tobacco movement; For example something like / Prelude to Nazi anti-tobacco campaign / Anti-tobacco measures / Effectiveness / Research / Reproductive policies / Controversies / Hitler's attitude towards smoking / After World War II / This is a quick attempt of highlighting the article and assisting the reader as they discover the subject.
...Deutscher Tabakgegnerverein zum Schutze der Nichtraucher... Is it worth translating a title (or all titles) as this might give an idea of the feeling towards smoking and smokers at the time. for example babelfish (I know basic but)comes up with ...German tobacco opponent association for the protection of the nonsmokers... which is in itself quite a bold maybe aggressive statement. Maybe so as not to break up the article they could be in referenced in the notes?
...was published in 1912 and this journal continued to be published until 1932.... could this and like examples be pared down e.g. ...was published between 1912 and 1932...

I am impressed, informative factual and a reasonably easy read. Edmund Patrick – confer 14:56, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Prose/order of words: Yes, I have changed many wordings like the one you pointed, in the section Prelude to Nazi anti-tobacco campaign etc.
Section: Actually the sections Hitler's attitude towards smoking, Reproductive policies and Research are the background of Nazi anti-tobacco measures or in other language these were the factors due to which the Nazis tried to control tobacco smoking. Hitler's personal feelings on tobacco was a factor, the reproductive policies of the Nazis were a major factor behind this anti-smoking movement. They wanted more children from German mothers, and when it was revealed that smoking may be the cause of stillbirth and miscarriage, they became afraid of this. Hence they became eager to control smoking. Research was another factor which motivated the Nazi leaders to implement anti-tobacco measures. This is why I arranged the sections Hitler's attitude towards smoking, Reproductive policies and Research first.
Translation: English translation added for all German names. Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 17:49, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GA second review

Nazi Germany was and is a common name for Germany under the Nazis but is not universal (see Nazi Germany), and as I have mentioned before I think a link needs to be made from Nazi to the Nazi Party. For example the first sentence: [[The “National Socialist German Workers’ Party” —(NSDAP)of Germany initiated a strong anti-tobacco movement[1] and led the first public anti-smoking campaign in modern history.[2]
Surely it would be better to wikilink ...The Nazi leadership condemned smoking[5]...to List of Nazi Party leaders and officials and change the wikilink for ...the Nazis came to power.[3]... to Nazi Germany. The same link acn be left for the Third Reich, as there maybe readers unaware that the Reich and Nazi Germany were one and the same thing.
I am not sure of the relevance of the wikilink from ...imposing restrictions on restaurants to a list of Germany restaurants today.
...existed in Germany in the early 1910s,...has Germany linked again, but to another page. Can the sentence be changed to bring this to people's notice?
...The Nazis used several public relations tactics to influence the general population of Germany into not smoking... has a link to modern day demographics, can the reader on this subject gain anything from the linked article? I can ask the same question about the link from ...In 1941, tobacco smoking in trams was outlawed in Germany's sixty large urban settlements.[26]...to List of cities in Germany with more than 100,000 inhabitants; and the link Economy of Germany from ...American cigarette manufactures quickly entered the German market...
I believe the article is written in British English, which is fine American or British has no baring on the GA review but in the text for Image:Tabak-Kapital.gif labour is written as labor (American English)

As you can see from the above I have a couple of concerns. I think the wikilinks to specific sections of article is very well done, but let down by links to articles that discuss Germany or its structures post war or of today. An other is making a link from Nazi Germany to the National Socialist German Workers’ Party. One more is the reliance on Proctor for many of the references, as soon as any others come about please update the article. Any thoughts / questions please let me know, as I have said a very good and interesting article. Edmund Patrick – confer 17:32, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes it is right Nazi Germany is not the universally accepted name, but I think the first sentence if we start as "The National Socialist German Workers’ Party of Germany initiated a strong anti-tobacco movement", it should be noted that Nazi party existed before 1933 also. Thus it may become confusing whether the movement was started before the Nazis formed government or after 1933. While Nazi Germany is not the official name, it is generally used in English to describe Germany from 1933 to 1945. And the anti-tobacco movement was started after they formed government.
You have raised a good point, I have removed the problematic wikilinks.
Actually the article uses American spellings like organization, so I think it may be an option to change all the spellings to American. Hence I kept the spelling labor and changed ageing > aging.
I have removed all the wikilinks which are linking to present day Germany. Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 20:00, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GA third review

Dear Editors; I have accessed the article (before I escape these shores for a brief while) with an idea to see if it could be awarded the GA. At this moment not, but only for the reasons below. I will review again upon my return.

You have just about convinced me of the value of Hitler section being so early in the article but, ..."it was a mistake, traceable to the army leadership at the time, at the beginning of the war". He also said that it was "not correct to say that a soldier cannot live without smoking".... is an important quote that needs to be referenced.
Images "bleed" over into other sections. Look at what <br></br> does to the layout in your sandbox. I tried it at the end of effectiveness section and found it acceptable. Practical layout is not my skill though, seek advise if you have too.
Image ...Production of cigarettes... still has a long text caption I believe but that itself has wikilinks that are repeats of ones in the main article. / cigarettes / Germany / Tobacco / World War Two / Wehrmacht / Too many wikilinks can make the reading of, and therefor the enjoyment of an article quite a problem. Unless it is to different sections of the same article words need only be wikilinked in their first instance, (unless that is in the lead when the second instance is acceptable).
Not sure why you chose american english and it is fine, but can you do a quick run through to check spellings. I am quite happy to upon my return, if necessary. Edmund Patrick – confer 16:37, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GA final summary

GA review (see here for criteria)

A good article. Checks need to be kept on wikilinks and as soon as other suitable cross-references become available they should be added.

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose): b (MoS):
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
verify and reference Hitler's statements on ...it was a mistake, traceable to the army leadership at the time, at the beginning of the war... and ...not correct to say that a soldier cannot live without smoking...
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
It is stable.
No edit wars etc.:
It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
excellent selection of images, keep captions short and layout needs tightening at some point but both are minor.
Overall:
Pass/Fail:
verify the statements / quotes from Hitler and this becomes an excellent GA.

The reference for the entire paragraph including the Hitler quote is The Nazi War on Cancer by Proctor, page 219. It is given at the end of the paragraph. Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 02:02, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GA Pass

GA review (see here for criteria)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose): b (MoS):
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
It is stable.
No edit wars etc.:
It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall:
Pass/Fail:
add new alternative references when they become available, and well done I have learnt from the article.