Talk:Bezen Perrot/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk · contribs) 04:02, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

Will take this one. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 04:02, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

• Section 1.1;
  • Link "Duchy of Brittany"

 Done

• • Also some context on Duchy of Brittany. As it is a medival concept and most of the readers will unaware of the term

Added context on the creation of the Duchy of Brittany.

• • Gallic tribes – termed the Armorici in Latin – had close relationships; use un-spaced em dashes

I rewrote it as:

"These Gallic tribes (termed the Armorici in Latin), had close relationships with the Britonnes tribes in Roman Britain."

• • Following his marriage? whose marriage

@Krishna Chaitanya Velaga:

"Following his marriage to Claude Duchess of Brittany, Francis I of France secured the Union of Brittany and France."

• • death of Francis III, Duke of Brittany (10 August 1536); suggest "death of Francis III, Duke of Brittany in 1536", the entire date is out of context for the article.

 Done

• • Link "king of France"

 Done

• • 18th century.^{[6] [7]}, delete the gap between references

 Done

• • World War I; mention the abrrevation WWI in braces as it is used in the later sentences

 Done

• Section 1.2;
  • In 1930, inspired by Breizh Atao's message Célestin Lainé a reserve artillery officer gathered a small group; suggest "In 1930, inspired by Breizh Atao's message, Célestin Lainé, a reserve artillery officer, gathered a small grou" observe the use of commas

 Done

• • 400-year-old; drop of the "-"

 Done

• • co–worker; it is a single word, coworker

 Done

• • Link alibi

 Done

• • A comma (,) after "him to Gerhard von Tevenar (de)"

 Done

• • 50 kilos; use conversion template, {{convert}}

 Done

• • August 1939, 3 September 1939; drop the year 1938, per MOS:DATEVAR

 Done

• • before the end of October a military tribunal had already condemned him to a five-year sentence; this is a bit awkward, rephrase

Rewrote it as:

"Lainé was recalled into the army, he was promptly convicted of sowing defeatism within his unit, and sentenced to five years of imprisonment by a military tribunal."

• • Mention LVF in full

 Done

• • A comma (,) after Yann Bricler

 Done

• Section 2;
  • A comma after "Georges Cadoudal"

 Done

• • 15 December 1943; drop the year

 Done

• • Mention STO in full

 Done

• • intelligence chief Jean Chanteau deserted; just "Chanteau deserted" is enough, as it is just a redundant and also per MOS:LASTNAME

 Done

• All good with Section 3
• I see that the licensing of both the images is not appropriate. I'll raise this later.
• No dabs and external links are good
• 15% violiation, unlikely.

Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 06:07, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

I've been asked to have a look at the image licensing. File:Debeauvais.jpg is an image of a magazine that was apparently published in 1944, so French/EU copyright law would apply, and if Lainé published it, the copyright would presumably be his. Given he only died in 1983, the copyright wouldn't expire until 2053 (70 years pma (post mortem author)) unless his copyright was voided by some French law that took away his rights because he was a collaborator, or someone else actually published it (in which case we'd need to know when they died). I also doubt the headshot of Lainé is PD unless it was published a long time ago and/or the photographer died a long time ago, in which case where it was published (and/or when the photographer died) would be needed. Given his importance to this subject, a reasonable non-free use rationale could probably be argued in the case of the second image. If you would like to have a look at a non-free rationale for a non-bio infobox image, you could do worse than use File:Artur Phleps and Kurt Waldheim.jpg as a guide, it made it through FAC. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:38, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

@Catlemur: I see that all the issues were resolved except the images. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 11:26, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

@Krishna Chaitanya Velaga: I removed the images and placed a new one from the German Federal Archive. The copyright should be fine now.--Catlemur (talk) 11:43, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

---

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 03:06, 15 January 2017 (UTC)