Template:Did you know nominations/Lev Gatovsky
- 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: rejected by reviewer, closed by Launchballer talk 14:25, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Lev Gatovsky
- ... that Lev Gatovsky was one of the first economists to create a theoretical framework to analyze the Soviet economy?
https://doi.org/10.1080%2F09668135308409872
https://www.marxists.org/subject/economy/authors/pe/index.htm- Reviewed:
5x expanded by FranGallego33 (talk).
Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has less than 5 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.FranGallego33 (talk) 22:11, 27 April 2024 (UTC).
- 5X expansion reverted because the added content was copyright protected. David notMD (talk) 02:31, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
-
Article has still been 5x expanded; it just now has empty sections, and so can't run per WP:DYKCOMPLETE. Suggest giving FranGallego33 some time to fill the gaps in their own words.--Launchballer 09:02, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
- Confirming that only part of what FrabGallego33 added was reverted for copyright infringement. My mistake. David notMD (talk) 09:09, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
New reviewer needed. Z1720 (talk) 15:48, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
I'm sorry. I've rejected very few DYK nominations for style issues because DYK isn't supposed to be WP:GA, a starter article is supposed to be fine. But this is simply not WP:DYKCOMPLETE.
- Most important is that much of the body of the article, describing his work, is near incomprehensible; examples below but it's throughout. I mean, that certainly reflects Soviet economic policy, but surely we shouldn't follow their example in writing our encyclopedia articles!
- Half the article is big block quotes of impenetrable verbiage. I count 48 lines of quotations, and 55 lines not of quotations. (This differs based on how wide you set your screen of course, but the relative count should apply.) They're not even credited: who says each block of text? Why does their opinion on Gatovsky matter?
According to Miller
- who's Miller, and why should we care? Can't we summarize the opinions of reviewers and critics in our own words, naming them and why their opinions matter, but much, much briefer? And hopefully more comprehensibly? This isn't golden prose that we shouldn't alter, "We hold these truths to be self-evident" stuff, this is just a review of an economic text. - Why emphasize
Jewish
in the first sentence? I mean, I know why, being Jewish in the Soviet Union was a big deal, but that's only because I'm a Jewish Soviet emigre myself, that shouldn't be a requirement to read the article. We need to say why it mattered, and how it affected him specifically, otherwise... in the Soviet Union, calling someone Jewish was basically an ethnic slur. - Misspellings or archaisms -
theorical
,wether
,geralization
- accompanied by numerous grammar errors. Not a big deal in itself, DYK is not GA, but the number of them implies the article was written carelessly, by computer translation, or scanning, or all of the above. Note the last word inFor the period before I929
- yes, that's a capital I there, not a 1. I strongly suspect that's a scanning error. We should be summarizing, not scanning. - Third sentence:
During World War II, he and other 26 members of the institute volunteered in the 21st Infantry Division.
This is his early life? If he was born in 1903, he was what, nearly 40? What institute? The Institute of Economics? The only previous sentence about any Institute says he became its Corresponding Member in 1965, was he a member during WWII? This is the single sentence in the whole article that isn't about his writing, and this is supposed to be a bio; did he have parents, spouse(s), children? Hopes, dreams, hobbies? Prison terms? (This is the Soviet Union we're talking about, if you were in public life but never imprisoned for a period you were an exception!) That in itself wouldn't disqualify, since it's a DYK not a GA, but isn't good. - Even more impenetrable quotes, this time short, possibly from Gatovsky, though even this is less clear:
"regularities"
- what does that mean?Although considered to be a formal study in dialectical logic, it considers "the proletariat as the chief productive force and exerciser of class hegemony"
. What does any of that mean? What is "considered to be a formal study in dialectical logic"? Gatovsky's pamphlet? He was a logician now, not an economist? To him, the main concern of the Soviet economists of the early thirties was the difficulty for establishing a common framework that reconciliates Soviet political economy theory with the framing of the economic policy, which continued to increase in complexity. In this scenario Gatovsky represent the approach from the logical side.
Again, what does any of that mean?- Belgium section, we devote nine paragraphs about a single week of lectures. Why so much about so little?
- In fact, the whole Lectures section - sure, I guess it was important that he was one of the rare scientists/academics allowed out of the country, but we don't say that, instead we just give titles of his lectures, and other people giving lectures beside him. Academics giving lectures is not in itself notable, that's basically what they do.