Talk:Killing of Fausto and Iaio/GA1

GA Review

Passed. UndercoverClassicist (talk) 16:09, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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: UndercoverClassicist (talk · contribs) 21:50, 9 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I should be able to look at this in the next few days. UndercoverClassicist (talk) 21:50, 9 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hiya thanks for taking this on, I should be around to answer in the next days. Cheers, Mujinga (talk) 09:44, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I've had another read through: I think we're over the GA bar. Congratulations: the article has come on nicely. UndercoverClassicist (talk) 16:08, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved matters, no longer of concern

General

The Italian version of this article has quite a lot of details missing here, particularly on the weapons used, the work of Mauro Brutto and the attempts to investigate/prosecute the murder prior to 2000. Not all of that may be sourced, but would it be worth pulling some of it across?
I did look at the Italian page but it is indeed quite badly sourced. Quite a lot has been written on ballistics and weapons, do you want me to add something on that?
Point taken about bad sourcing; it might be that some of this is simply not verifiable, in which case it shouldn't be there. But to use the example you provide here, the Italian version does talk about what the murder weapon was, and briefly about how it was identified; in our version, it's just "a gun". That bit's closely sourced in the Italian (to the Il Post article), so I'd move it over. More generally, I suspect we could mine that article a little more. UndercoverClassicist (talk) 16:37, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I've added some more details on the gun Mujinga (talk) 17:32, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Criterion 6: Images

Currently illustrated by one image, which checks out. I've added FoP-Italy to its page on Commons: there's a possible legal headache here, but that's not one that I think we need to worry about.
Advisory: I think you'd have a clear Fair Use case to use the (perhaps better) pair of photographs at the top of the Italian article as the article's main image, rather than the mural. There's also a photo on Commons of the commemorative stone, and this one seems to commemorate them as well.
noted Mujinga (talk) 15:29, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

Criterion 1: Prose/MOS

For clarity, we need to briefly introduce key players and concepts here, particularly Lotta Continua, the Red Brigades, and how all of these things fit together. Some of this links to c3 below.
looking into this Mujinga (talk) 15:38, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

done using Katsiaficas Mujinga (talk) 16:36, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Advisory: The documentation for the infobox template says that websites should only be included if official; otherwise, they should be in an External Links section. I'm not sure a murder can have an official website; is there anything particularly exceptional about this one to justify keeping it in the infobox?
as I understand it, it's the "official" memorial site, hosted and updated by Leoncavallo Mujinga (talk) 15:38, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
My understanding is that official in this context only really applies to people, companies etc, where the subject of the article can actually run, endorse or otherwise be responsible for the website. So, if Paul McCartney is the subject of the article, the website in the infobox is his website. An event, concept etc can't really have an official site in the same way, so I think a strict reading of the documentation would advise a move to External Links. Not a serious problem for GA, though. UndercoverClassicist (talk) 16:37, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Criterion 2: WP:VERIFIABILITY, OR and sourcing

Spot checks to follow.

The long quoted text on note 8 may possibly violate WP:NFC: it seems to include a great deal that isn't included in the article. If you want that information (e.g. about the commemorative stone and its inscription), bring it in and paraphrase.
I'm following WP:NONENG although that can be read in different ways of course. I'll chop it down Mujinga (talk) 15:32, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes; under WP:NONENG, it's good practice to provide a quotation (and possibly a translation) for the material used in the article. There's no need to quote anything that isn't in the article, and indeed there's a positive reason not to do so under WP:NFC. UndercoverClassicist (talk) 16:37, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Advisory: bundling citations at the end of a paragraph is a perfectly legitimate citation style, but it's better for WP:TSI to place the citation as close as possible to the details it directly supports, particularly if/when you have multiple sources and not everything in the paragraph will be substantiated by both.
Advisory: there are lots of newspaper sources in the bibliography; have these murders made their way into printed, published books as well?
Advisory: While not strictly required for GAN, page numbers are hugely useful to establish WP:VERIFIABILITY and head off charges of WP:OR or WP:SYNTH. UndercoverClassicist (talk) 16:39, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Do you mean the Biacchessi? It's an ebook and doesn't have page numbers. Mujinga (talk) 17:26, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
As far as I can tell, none of the citations use specific page numbers for the supporting material. Again, that isn't a huge problem (and, as with ebooks and websites, sometimes isn't possible, but it's good to use them if/when it's an option. As I said, not a problem as far as the GAN is concerned in any case. UndercoverClassicist (talk) 18:38, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Then I'm not sure what you mean because all the books have page numbers, journals and newspapers don't tend to require a page number Mujinga (talk) 10:16, 13 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Some citation styles do suggest leaving out page numbers for journals/newspapers, but not all of them: I must admit to finding that bizarre, particularly in the case of academic journals, as they're nearly always paginated and that pagination is often important to where you're going to find the content online (for instance, different sections of the journal are often presented in different files or even different web pages). However, the GA criteria are happy as long as the source can be identified, so this isn't a real issue here. UndercoverClassicist (talk) 10:31, 13 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Criterion 3: Breadth and focus

This is where I think the article still has the most room to improve: comprehensiveness isn't required by the GA standards, so how far it goes may be largely a matter of taste.

I think an uninformed reader will need a little more detail in the background section as to what the "Years of Lead" were.
yeah I can see what you mean - I'll have a look into sources on Years of Lead (Italy) (crazy that has to be disambiguated) Mujinga (talk) 15:28, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
done using Katsiaficas Mujinga (talk) 16:37, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I think you could go even further here; I've added a subsection for the Years of Lead, and it still feels like things are being held back a little. For example, what exactly was the strategy of tension, and how did it manifest itself? How did the "Years of Lead" play out geographically: was Milan a central place for them, or had anything else happened in the city? On a 1a note: what was the date of Moro's kidnap (it's not clear whether 4 March or 16 March).

More generally, I understand at the start of the article that we're in a period of general political violence, and that at the end two young people have been murdered, but I don't yet see enough in the article to explain how it all joins together. Put another way, why is it important to include the "Years of Lead" as background to the story – what bearing does that part of the story have on the murder itself? I suspect that going into some more detail on the possible motives might help here. UndercoverClassicist (talk) 16:54, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't think the subsection was helpful so I removed it. I'm not sure how much detail is worth going into here, since the interested reader can click through on Hot Autumn, Years of Lead (Italy), Neo-fascism and Strategy of tension. The years of lead is the general background, but Fausto and Iaio may have been murdered by local drug dealers. Mujinga (talk) 17:38, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Following the rule we've applied elsewhere, connect the two inasfar as they have been connected by WP:HQRS. UndercoverClassicist (talk) 17:56, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps relatedly, I don't see any suggestion in this article about motive: has anyone credibly theorised as to why Fausto and Ioao would have been killed by right-wing groups?
There's lots of theories, could be part of the strategy of tension, could be the intelligence sources sending a message to the Red Brigades, could be the extreme rightwing taking a sort of revenge for the death of Anselmi (even if that doesn't make much sense), could be drug dealers worried about the heroin report. It's hard to know what / how much to add when it's all conjecture. Mujinga (talk) 15:26, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The rule (as with many things on this site) is to include what's been said in reliable, high-quality secondary sources, reporting it as conjecture or theory if necessary (e.g. "A rumour circulated in the aftermath of the murder that the CIA were involved"). UndercoverClassicist (talk) 16:37, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The lead mentions that they were left-wing activists, but I don't see any real mention of their activism, or what they did. As a WP:LEAD issue, this is significant to the GAN.
That's based on "frequented Centro Sociale Leoncavallo, a self-managed social centre" and "the two men participated in the research for a report into the local heroin trade". I'm not sure if there's much else to add, since they were quite young ... should I emphasise Leoncabvallo is leftwing? Mujinga (talk) 15:24, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
On the last point: yes; I get a vague sense that it's a sort of anarcho-communist something, but it's not massively clear what; if that's germane to the article, explanation would help. Has a high-quality reliable source described them as left-wing activists, or is that your inference from their involvement with Leoncavallo? UndercoverClassicist (talk) 16:37, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
There's also: "He was politically left-wing, sympathetic to Lotta Continua". I wouldn't say it's an inference as in SYNTH, if you are involved with Leoncavallo then that's implicitly what you are. In illustration Moretti writes "the killing of Fausto and Iaio on March 18, 1978. The latter case has been recently archived without finding out who shot the two young members of the Leoncavallo, but many believe that it was “a political murder against the left” (Faustoeiaio) and that it happened because Fausto and Iaio were involved in an anti-drug campaign (see Membretti, 2003: 92)" Mujinga (talk) 17:19, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
On that citation: Moretti cites the 'political murder against the left' to 'Faustoeiaio', which is the 'official' website, but I can't actually find that quotation there. Can you? UndercoverClassicist (talk) 18:01, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No I haven't seen it Mujinga (talk) 17:14, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
In that case, anything relying on "a political murder against the left" in Moretti really needs to be removed, though I'd be happy for that first quote ("he was politically left-wing...") to stand as evidence that Fausto's politics were left-wing. I think we need a bit more for the word activists, though. One source - I'm afraid I can't remember which - did go into some detail as to how the research they were doing into heroin was part of a larger left-wing project/movement: that might do? UndercoverClassicist (talk) 20:17, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Moretti is not currently used in the article? Mujinga (talk) 10:17, 13 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, my mistake. Do we have any sources at all for the word activists? I'm not sure that Together, the two men were participating in research for a report into the local heroin trade and its connection to local neofascists quite counts: I could be researching a report on the criminal activities of communist groups without being a right-wing activist. UndercoverClassicist (talk) 13:55, 13 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes but to maintain the example, my point was that just like if you were researching for CasaPound then it's clear you are a neofascist, if you are researching for Leoncavallo, then you are from the extraparliamentary left. Mujinga (talk) 18:13, 13 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I can accept that: the article doesn't currently say that they were researching for Leoncavallo, but if it did (and could be sourced as such), that would be enough.

Does Leoncavallo have a unified 'voice' in that way: leaders, plans, agendas... - or is it more of a space? Again, I'm still not totally clear on what it is, but that might be my non-Italianness showing. UndercoverClassicist (talk) 19:08, 13 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I've added a ref to make it clear it was a report being organised by Leoncavallo.

I've never been there but it's one of the most famous self-managed social centres in Italy. Since the 1970s (so Leoncavallo was one of the first), these left-wing spaces have provided resources for community activities and organization for the extraparliamentary left. For example, the Tute Bianche (White overalls) were connected to Leoncavallo in the 1990s and played a big role in alterglobalization protests.

Is there anything else that needs doing? Thanks, Mujinga (talk) 14:25, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I suppose I'm not seeing the join between "self-managed social centre... left-wing space" and the idea that it could have organised something. This is almost certainly my lack of understanding, but it reads almost like saying "the Circus Maximus organised a conference": the Circus Maximus is a place, so a group using that place could organise something, but the place/space itself can't. Does Leoncavallo have some kind of organising committee, collective voice, leadership etc to allow 'it' to make decisions? UndercoverClassicist (talk) 15:21, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
On a separate note, I realise that we now have that the research was done "with other Leoncavallo activists"; this still doesn't quite prove that the two were themselves activists. I think we still need to show that there was something inherently left-wing about participating in this project (that is, they're not just disinterested academics tagging along with true believers), or else that they had previously been involved in other left-wing activities, or else that simply setting foot in Leoncavallo was enough make you an activist. UndercoverClassicist (talk) 21:23, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
We seem to be getting a bit stuck here, so maybe if I go back to the sources I'm drawing on it will help find the way forward:
Moretti (not currently in article but could be added) says: "Interestingly, the social centre Leoncavallo responded to the accusation that youth from the social centres participated violently in the morning rally by reminding the city of the tragic disappearances and forgettings which mark the history of Milan. These include the murder of Dax, one of the youth from the social centres whose death (in 2003) anniversary falls on March 16, and the killing of Fausto and Iaio on March 18, 1978. The latter case has been recently archived without finding out who shot the two young members of the Leoncavallo, but many believe that it was “a political murder against the left” (Faustoeiaio) and that it happened because Fausto and Iaio were involved in an anti-drug campaign (see Membretti, 2003: 92)."

Mudu and Piazza say:"Furthermore, heroin began to circulate in Italian cities in 1975, with its prevalence proportional to the destruction of social movements. 6 Radical-left groups tried to fight heroin diffusion, but were defeated. Drug dealers, often linked to neo-fascist groups, were even killed by leftist groups in Rome and Milan in 1978. In response, the drug dealers fought back. In Milan, the two young activists Fausto Tinelli and Lorenzo (Iaio) Iannucci from the squatted Social Centre, Leoncavallo, who were investigating drug dealers’ activities, were shot and killed in March 1978, causing outrage amongst activists. 7 The number of drug addicts in Italy increased from about 20,000 in 1976 to 50,000 by the end of 1977, rising to 100,000 in 1978 and 200–250,000 at the end of 1982. The circulation of heroin, the increasing presence of fascists and police attacks, all progressed in combination." p114

Clement says: "The extra�parliamentary Left entered a deep crisis, because the rising unemployment attracted in its ranks wide layers of both skilled and unskilled labour whose expectations for a positive change had been frustrated. h e LC ended in 1976, the PO in 1973 and the AO and MLS in 1975. h e narrowing of political spaces made all of them think that armed struggle was the only way to achieve revolution. Moreover, the 1976 Festival of the Youth Proletariat held in Milan, at Parco Lambro, ended up a mas�sive failure, demonstrating how heroin use was spreading among youth and putting to the fore the necessity to i ght the pushers, most of which bought the drug from such fascist dealers as Rudy Crovace, killed in 1983 (Colaprico 2008 ). Militant anti-fascism turned into anti-pusher actions, with such tragic episodes as the still mysterious killing, in 1978, of Fausto Tinelli and ‘Iaio’ Iannucci, two comrades who had set up a file contain�ing the names of the fascists involved in drug dealing, which was later to disappear." p157

Il Riformista says: "L’omicidio di Fausto Tinelli e Lorenzo “Iaio” Iannucci, due diciottenni militanti di sinistra frequentatori del centro sociale “Leoncavallo”, venne commesso a Milano il 18 marzo 1978."

Il Post says: "Il 18 marzo di quarant’anni fa due studenti di sinistra, Fausto Tinelli e Lorenzo Iannucci, conosciuti come Fausto e Iaio, vennero uccisi con otto colpi di pistola a Milano, in via Mancinelli, vicino al centro sociale Leoncavallo." - although I don't think it's correct to label them students

Moulaert et al say: "In the final case-study included in this issue, the Leoncavallo social centre in Milan, Andrea Membretti analyses the bottom-up response to the lack of social and cultural services in a former industrial area of Milan as a revealing experience of social innovation, characterized by a pragmatic political horizon. Leoncavallo social centre, a selfmanaged and Left-wing social, cultural and political association founded in 1975, has been operating for over 30 years as a provider of social services in two different locations, both abandoned factories, illegally occupied and restored by the activists of the centre themselves (the first one was closed down by the police in 1994 and the centre relocated to its current site). The centre’s activities have contributed to defining and responding to two different but intertwined categories of needs: culture and sociality on the one hand, and welfare and social services on the other hand. In addition, Leoncavallo has always promoted a radically different vision of urban development, in opposition to the neo-liberal discourse and practice of ‘urban re-generation’, thereby moving from a claim for collective rights to a claim for the re-appropriation and creation of social spaces. Through an interesting process of ‘flexible’ institutionalization, Leoncavallo has been able to survive the post-1968 era, avoiding the risk of social marginalization and evolving into an important political actor on the national and also international scene. The latter process has been strengthened through its involvement in the alternative globalization movement. The core of this pragmatic approach to institutionalization dynamics is the management of collective services in a participatory and informal manner, based on the principle of autogestione (self-management)." p205

I think these sources back what I am saying, what do you think? Leoncavallo is described by academics as an entity and Fausto and Iaio are mentioned in different ways to be left-wing, involved with Leoncavallo, working on a drugdealing report etc There is of course Biacchessi as well, but it's in Italian and on a keyword search I didn't find much to add. Mujinga (talk) 10:29, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, those sources more than prove the point. Mudu and Piazza are good on the activists point; Il Riformista is also useful (if an outlier) for that militanti epithet. The context in Mudu and Piazza (that is, the link between investigating drugs and fighting fascists) is also useful and important. Don't be afraid of including detail and quantity where it's helpful and illuminating. UndercoverClassicist (talk) 10:52, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
OK so can you suggest what needs doing? For me the article already summarises the sources, but obviously there's something you feel that needs adding (and ofc Moretti isn't used currently). Mujinga (talk) 11:04, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Might be easier if I edit in some suggestions, using the sources you've quoted here: will do so this evening. UndercoverClassicist (talk) 12:32, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I would rather you didn't do that to be honest, you have already edited the article quite a lot, which I find strange since you haven't discussed the changes first let alone given the normal disclaimer of "I've made some edits, feel free to revert". For me it's unusual for a GA reviewer to be making any edits beyond typos etc. So I'd rather discuss things here first. Mujinga (talk) 09:24, 17 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Articles on this site belong to everybody, and nobody has copy approval or the right of veto over potential changes. I've quite often had reviewers at GA and FAC make edits to articles I've nominated, though I suppose it's important to make sure that we don't create a conflict of interest by essentially becoming co-nominators as well as reviewers.

With that said, I've got no desire to be unnecessarily confrontational. A few suggestions might be:

* Get the word "activists" somewhere into the body text, cited to Mudu and Piazza, and perhaps the word "militants", if you think that's in keeping with the general body of sources, cited to Il Post. That's important for MOS:LEAD.

* Expand With other Leoncavallo activists, the two men were researching the local heroin trade and its connection to local neofascists to something like Along with other activists from Leoncavallo, The two men were researching the local heroin trade, an activity dominated by neofascist dealers throughout Italy, and compiling a dossier of known neofascists involved in it. Clement has described such anti-heroin activism as a development of "militant anti-fascism" in the late 1970s., and cite Clement p157. That properly contextualises their research and creates the link between left-wing activism, heroin research and fascism. Whatever the precise wording, WP:DUEWEIGHT means that that link really needs to be made and cited to good sources. UndercoverClassicist (talk) 18:05, 17 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the suggestions, I'll look into it.

I doubt you have "often" had reviewers changing things when you have four GAs and I don't really like your last edit summary suggesting I am owning this article when we are in a review situation. The problem is that if you carry on, you'd become a significant contributor to the article, negating "The nomination may be reviewed by any registered user who has not contributed significantly to the article". Significant contribution can be defined as over 10% of the article, right now you are on 3% so I thought I should flag it up. Mujinga (talk) 12:28, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Get the word "activists" somewhere into the body text, cited to Mudu and Piazza - done
perhaps the word "militants" - it only seems to be Il Poste using that term
Expand ... and cite Clement - done
I've tried to rejig the theories section so there is more explanation, which is what I think you found was lacking. Thanks again for the suggestions.

Mujinga (talk) 13:33, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Four far-right groups claimed responsibility for the killings: which ones? In general, don't hold back true, well-sourced, factual information from the reader: we never know what someone is going to be looking for when they come to the article. UndercoverClassicist (talk) 16:37, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I've mentioned Revolutionary National Army, Brigata combattente Franco Anselmi which seems to be the only credible claim, the others were just free publicity for the far-right Mujinga (talk) 17:07, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
We need to make a call here, then: either those claims aren't notable at all (because no reliable source reported them as claims, and so that sentence shouldn't be in the article, or they are (again, not necessarily because they were credible: it's notable and interesting if these groups lied about being involved), and so the four groups should be named. After all, if we're not confident enough in our sources to know which groups we're counting, we're not confident enough to say that there's (exactly) four. At the moment, we're stuck in the middle of this dilemma. UndercoverClassicist (talk) 17:21, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No the information is sourced to Biachessi, who may well name all four groups (I don't remember off the top of my head); I just don't think it's particularly relevant to name them all Mujinga (talk) 17:35, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Up to you; if it's in the source, I think it should be there (after all, someone might come here wanting to know if the Bad Eggs Brigade was involved in the crime); equally, if the count is all that Biachessi gives us, that's all we can say. Wikipedia isn't a paper encyclopaedia, so there's no cost to us for adding more information, and no reason to omit things which are true, sourced and potentially useful. This article is nowhere near being too long, but if it were, we would simply WP:SPLIT it. UndercoverClassicist (talk) 18:10, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I had a look again at Biachessi, he names the Gruppo Prima Linea Destra Nazionale, which doesn't seem to be known for anything else and I'd say would be confusing for the lay reader since it contains "Prima Linea", which was a leftwing gorup. Mujinga (talk) 17:36, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Personally, I'd name it and include an EFN saying "not to be confused with the left-wing Prima Linea", but I won't press this point. UndercoverClassicist (talk) 20:12, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
One of the groups claiming responsibility was the Revolutionary National Army, Brigata combattente Franco Anselmi, which referenced the death of Anselmi days before: what was the Brigata and who was Anselmi? When they 'referenced' his death, did they link it to that of Fausto and Iaio (e.g., did they claim that they had murdered them in revenge, held them responsible for it...)
Anselmi is linked on previous mention: "on 6 March 1978, neofascist Franco Anselmi had been shot dead whilst robbing a gun shop in Rome". Mujinga (talk) 17:52, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This is what Biachessi reports:

Il giorno dopo, alle 21,30, in una cabina telefonica di via Leone IV a

Roma, la polizia rinviene un volantino in triplice copia, firmato «Esercito

nazional rivoluzionario, Brigata combattente Franco Anselmi.»

È scritto con una macchina elettrica, porta un simbolo nuovo, come

intestazione una runa celtica in un cerchio con le iniziali Enr.

«Sabato 18 marzo una nostra brigata armata di Milano ha giustiziato i

servi del sistema Tinelli Fausto e Iannucci Lorenzo. Con questo gesto

vogliamo vendicare la morte di tutti i camerati assassinati dagli strumenti

della reazione e della sovversione. Noi non crediamo nella lotta comunista

contro lo Stato, perché, avendo tutte le forze di sinistra la medesima

mentalità di questo sistema, esse sono solamente i servi di questo regime. È

quindi per questa ragione che l’unica forza veramente rivoluzionaria è

rappresentata dall’estrema destra. Sappiano i sovversivi che non

riusciranno a eliminarci: da questo momento cominceremo ad agire, nulla

ci potrà fermare; siamo stanchi di piangere i nostri camerati. Falvella,

Ramelli, Zicchieri, Mantakas, Ciavatta, Bigonzetti, Recchioni marciano

nelle nostre file e gridano vendetta. Viva la rivoluzione fascista, morte al

sistema e ai suoi servi, onore ai camerati assassinati dal Fronte Rosso e

dalla reazione.»

L’ultimo messaggio è del 25 marzo 1978. Mujinga (talk) 17:53, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
OK: there's quite a lot there that could explain how the group rationalised the "execution" of the two victims, particularly this idea that they (and all leftists) were "servants of the system". It's not good practice to quote primary sources at length (especially one so frankly distasteful), but a summary of this would be extremely beneficial to the article. UndercoverClassicist (talk) 20:14, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I've added a sentence on that Mujinga (talk) 10:22, 13 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It is reasonably well written.
a. (prose, spelling, and grammar):
Clears the bar: this might be a good area on which to focus for further improvement.

b. (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a. (reference section):

b. (citations to reliable sources):

c. (OR):

Well cited throughout and good sources.

d. (copyvio and plagiarism):

Earwig is happy, and I've been able to check most of the sources to some extent or another: I have found no reason for concern.
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 and other media, where possible and appropriate.
a. (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales):

b. (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall:
Pass/fail:

(Criteria marked are unassessed)

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.