Talk:Sonderbehandlung/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Tea with toast (話) 20:45, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Initial comments and concerns

I am glad to find this article to be very well researched and well written. I have a few small concerns about this article that I would like to have addressed before I pass this article for review:

1. In the the first sentence in the section "Sensitivity": "Heinrich Himmler became increasingly sensitive to the security of...", I think the word "sensitive" may be too vague since the word has multiple meanings. I would prefer to have a more specific term like "he was concerned about the security" or something similar.

•  Done WilliamH (talk) 20:55, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

2. The the placement of section "Purpose" at the end of the article seems a bit strange to me. In most articles, the purpose of the topic is usually one of the first sections. Being that there are only 2 paragraphs, they could be merged into different sections. Both could probably fit in the section "Usage". The paragraph with Lang's quote is significant enough that it could also be added to the lead.

I will place the review on hold until an editor has addressed these concerns. --Tea with toast (話) 21:39, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

•  Done Lang's quote has been moved to the lead, and I've moved van Pelt's comment on the staff at Auschwitz to the end of the section on Auschwitz, where I think it forms a good concluding paragraph. WilliamH (talk) 00:03, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Final assessment

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose quality:

   B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. References to sources:

   B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

   C. No original research:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   B. Focused:

4. Is it neutral?

   Fair representation without bias:

5. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

   A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

   B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

   Great job! This has been a very interesting and informative article to review. --Tea with toast (話) 00:13, 30 August 2011 (UTC)