Jump to content

Talk:Rotter kidnapping

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Did you know nomination

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by AirshipJungleman29 talk 16:29, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(
)
Created by TheBritinator (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 7 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

TheBritinator (talk) 13:46, 24 March 2024 (UTC).[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
  • Cited: Yes - Offline/paywalled citation accepted in good faith
  • Interesting: Yes
QPQ: Done.

Overall: @TheBritinator: The article was new enough at the time of nomination, it covers the topic, it adheres to policies. I have assumed good faith on the sources written in German, a language I am not able to read. I was able to see the information about ALT1 in the provided link, but that source is not cited in the article, so I will assume good faith that the German-language source cited in the article also verifies this same information. I am inclined to approve the nomination and both hooks (kidnapping is a sufficiently dramatic thing to be hooky even on its own, and Fritz Rotter's escape may strike many a reader as being like something out of a movie). However, there are some issues in the article that I think warrant resolution to improve the article's quality and readers' probable comprehension:

  • a failed organized kidnapping of German film directors and theatre managers Fritz Rotter and Alfred Rotter of Jewish background in Liechtenstein by citizens: The word order here is difficult to parse. I suggest "a failed organized kidnapping in Liechtenstein of Fritz Rotter and Alfred Rotter, German film directors and theatre managers of Jewish background, by citizen" etc.
  • However, by 1933 due to the two men's Jewish background, they were the target of pressure by the rise of Nazism in Germany and in January 1933 they were forced to declare bankruptcy and emigrated to Liechtenstein: Some punctuation and word choice makes this sentence difficult to parse, and to say "pressure by the rise of Nazism" reads oddly because it seems almost to give this social phenomenon individuated agency, like it could will to pressure the Rotters. Consider the following instead: "However, due to the two men's Jewish background, they were the target of pressure contemporaneous with the rise of Nazism in Germany, and in January 1933 they were forced to declare bankruptcy and emigrated to Liechtenstein".
  • In particular, the Rotters became the target of attacks as they falsely accused them of faking their bankruptcy: In the current form, this reads as if "they" means the Rotters accused themselves. I suggest revising this to "In particular, the Rotters became the target of attacks as Nazi sympathisers falsely accused the Rotters of faking their bankruptcy" etc.
  • As a result, it publicly demanded: I think this should read As a result, it was publicly demanded.
  • Four local Liechtensteiners Nazis - Rudolf Schädler, Franz Roeckle, Peter Rheinbeger and Eugen Frommelt used the German press demands: Two matters here: first, as "Liechtensteiner" is being used as an adjective, it should be rendered as if singular with no s at the end. Second, since you use an en dash to launch the list of the four conspirators, it should be used to end it as well, i. e., "Four local Liechtensteiners Nazis - Rudolf Schädler, Franz Roeckle, Peter Rheinbeger and Eugen Frommelt – used the German press demands" etc.
  • Fritz domestic partner Julie Wolff: Should be "Frit's" and "Wolff,".
  • at the health resort in Gaflei on the Alps, of which he managed: I think "the health resort" should be "a health resort" (as this resort has not been previously introduced such that the reader would recognize it via a definite article the) and the latter portion should be "resort in Gaflei on the Alps that he managed"—the comma and 'of' and 'which' interfere with the seemingly intended meaning of the clause. Additionally, per DYK's rule on hook fact citation, this sentrence requires a citation, even if it's a redundant one identical to the citation in an adjacent sentence, because "The facts of the hook in the article should be cited no later than the end of the sentence in which they appear", and this provides the fact that the kidnapping took place in 1933.
  • deliberately undermined: I'm not sure this is the right word to use. Would this be "deliberately downplayed"? "deliberately suppressed"? "deliberately and falsely discredited"?
  • Fritz Rotter's lawyer, Wladimir Rosenbaum was: A comma seems to be missing between "Rosenbaum" and "was".

As these are mostly matters of grammar and rewording, they seem surmountable. I would be willing to approve the nomination after revisions. Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 09:34, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Hydrangeans, I have addressed what you have mentioned. Please take another look when you can. TheBritinator (talk) 17:00, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@TheBritinator: Thank you for the responsiveness! I notice just a couple of matters seem to have slipped through:
  • As a result, it publicly demanded: This still needs revision; either "it was publicly demanded" or replace "it" with a noun, because currently the antecedent confusion makes it seem as if the demand demanded itself.
  • partner Julie Wolff were: A comma is still missing after "were".
  • stay at the health resort, which he managed: This has not been revised to "a health resort that he managed". The use of a definite article implies a certain recognizability of the health resort that isn't the case for a reader who may, up to this point, have no idea there were any health resorts in Gaflei.
As before, since these are matters of relatively minor grammar and rewording, they are surmountable, and I'm willing to approve the nomination after revisions. Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 17:47, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Hydrangeans, thanks for the clarification. This should be completed now. TheBritinator (talk) 18:17, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@TheBritinator: Alps, of which he managed should still be either "Alps that he managed" or "Alps which he managed"; the "of" inhibits the meaning here, implying as it does a plurality of items rather than a singular. Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 18:24, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Hydrangeans: Done. TheBritinator (talk) 13:50, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@TheBritinator: Nearly there. I noticed that the sentence beginning On 5 April 1933 does not have a citation at the end of it. As this sentence verifies part of the hook that states the event happened in 1933, per DYK's rule on hook fact citation, this sentence requires a citation, even if it's a redundant one identical to the citation in an adjacent sentence, because "The facts of the hook in the article should be cited no later than the end of the sentence in which they appear", and this provides the hook fact that the kidnapping took place in 1933. Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 18:02, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Hydrangeans: Got a bit delayed but its now done. TheBritinator (talk) 15:10, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@TheBritinator: Thanks for the revisions. With these matters resolved, I now approve the nomination, presuming good faith for the German-language sources used in the article. Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 17:50, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Potential inaccuracies in Aftermath section

[edit]

At the moment, the Aftermath section states that “Fritz Rotter and his wife would shortly after leave Liechtenstein and with assistance from Wladimir Rosenbaum, would live in exile in France until his death in 1939.”

Now, there are two potential ways to interpret the final passage – was it the death of Rosenbaum or Rotter? In the former case, just a bit more clarity would suffice; in the latter, there seems to be a major contradiction there – Fritz Rotter’s own article notes that he had emigrated to the US and died in 1984 in Switzerland (and his IMDb page certainly has a lot of credits extending well into the ‘60s). There doesn’t appear to be a cited source there, so it could well be false – and I’ve no way to check with the cited source in this article; but perhaps someone would be willing to look into this and smooth this out? Vadim Galimov (talk) 11:55, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm fairly certain that they are not the same person. As according to the sources regarding this it is a different Fritz Rotter, who died in a French prison in 1939. TheBritinator (talk) 12:15, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Well, what are the odds! Can you clarify which sources in particular? Seems like the kidnapped Fritz’s year of birth should clear things up; if this is indeed the case, I’ll re-edit the other Rotter’s article to avoid future confusion. Besides, the “died in exile” passage should probably be re-worded, too, then, to include the prison bit. Vadim Galimov (talk) 13:25, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

[edit]
Passed. Arconning · (talk · contribs) 09:39, 12 June 2024 (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.

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Rotter kidnapping/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: TheBritinator (talk · contribs) 03:03, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: Arconning (talk · contribs) 06:31, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I will be reviewing this, comments will probably be finished in the next 72 hours! Arconning (talk) 06:31, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Prose and MoS

[edit]

Infobox and lead

[edit]
 Done
  • Lead is a bit short but it's alright.
 Done
  • Probably mention the other victims and specify the names of the perpetrators.
Not sure if this is necessary, might convolute the lead a bit.

Background

[edit]
  • by 1933, Nazism in Germany, and in January 1933, due to this, from the press, add comma at the end.
 Done
  • Jewish background, pluralize.
 Done
  • emigrated, emigrate.
 Done
  • as they falsely accused, change to who falsely accused.
 Done

Kidnapping

[edit]
  • along with Alfred's wife, Fritz's domestic partner, Gaflei on the Alps, though once he realized, who was also injured, re-unite with Julie Wolff, add comma at the end.
 Done
  • This however, was unsuccessful as they fought back and began to escape on foot., rewrite, probably omit however.
 Done

Trials and aftermath

[edit]
  • Rheinbeger and Frommelt, add comma after Rheinbeger. Wikipedia:Manual of Style#Serial commas, though per the same MoS entry, not really ambiguous therefore it can be kept but I would recommend for it to be added.
 Done
  • In October of the same year, Liechtenstein to come to an end, after leave Liechtenstein and, add comma at the end.
 Done
  • Italicize mentions of "Stolperstein" in image caption.
 Done

Images

[edit]
  • Images have proper licenses and are relevant.

Refs

[edit]
  • Reference all seem reliable.
  • For reference 2, remove the "last=Editorial" as it's not the name of the author. Vice versa with reference 4.
 Done
  • For reference 6, when using the wikilinked page of an author, use the "authorlink=" template without the [] brackets for the page of the author, then the "first=" and "last=" for the name of the author, so that it's formatted properly.
 Done

Spotchecks

[edit]
  • Earwig picks like 1% which is like negligible. Manual check shows no sign of copyright violations/plagiarism.

Misc

[edit]
Addressed the comments, @Arconning:. Let me know if anything more needs done. Thanks. TheBritinator (talk) 18:43, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Good Article review progress box
Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV ()
3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant ()
Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Rotter_kidnapping&oldid=1228635669"