Talk:Rommel myth/GA1

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: Biblioworm (talk · contribs) 02:38, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Looks interesting. Biblio (talk) Reform project. 02:38, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Rommel was subsequently able, with an intervention from Hitler, to obtain command of a Panzer division despite being earlier turned down by the army's personnel office... - Place "earlier" after "turned"
Going against military protocol, this was noted by Rommel's fellow officers and added to Rommel's growing reputation as one of Hitler's favored commanders. - This sentence gives the impression that the officers went against protocol by noting the promotion. It should be clarified, perhaps as follows: "The unusual promotion of Rommel went against military protocol, and this was noted..."
Patrick Major argues that the desert war indeed proved a suitable space to effect the reconciliation among the former enemies. The British popular history focused on the reconstruction of the fighting in that theatre of war, almost to the exclusion of all others. - "among" -> "between". Also, what is meant by "the reconstruction of the fighting"? Currently, it is not quite clear what is meant by that phrase.
...has also been criticized by historian Mark Connelly as "encapsulates the post-1945 hagiographic approach". - "as encapsulates" does not read properly. Perhaps "as it 'encapsulates...'" was meant?

Done. K.e.coffman (talk) 02:43, 11 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Young's biography was another step in the development of the Rommel myth – with Rommel emerging as an active, if not a leading, plotter. - Change dash to comma
The trend continued with other uncritical biographies, such as Rommel as Military Commander (1968) by the former Desert Rat and author Ronald Lewin and Knight's Cross: A Life of Field Marshal Erwin Rommel (1994) by the high-ranking British officer David Fraser. - Comma between "(1968)" and "by"; comma between "Lewin" and "and"; comma between "(1994)" and "by"
Fraser's biography, while remaining a work of high reputation,[55][56][57][58] with Pier Paolo Battistelli praising it for the outstanding handling of the issue of Rommel's myth as well as his life and career in general, has also been criticised by historian Mark Connelly as "encapsulat[ing] the post-1945 hagiographic approach". - I recommend splitting this sentence in two, like so: "Fraser's biography remained a work of high reputation, with Pier Paolo Battistelli praising it for the outstanding handling of the Rommel myth as well as Rommel's overall life and career. However, the work has also been criticised by historian Mark Connelly as "encapsulat[ing] the post-1945 hagiographic approach."

-"Remains", not "remained", I think.-Deamonpen (talk) 00:16, 17 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Connelly offers the example of Fraser writing about Rommel as one of the "great masters of manoeuvre in war", whose personalities "transcend time" and "cut like [a] sabre through the curtains of history". - Change "Fraser writing about Rommel" to "Fraser's describing of Rommel"; change "personalities" to "personality"
The historian Patrick Major points out a recent work, the 2002 book Alamein: War without Hate by Colin Smith and John Bierman that borrowed the name of Rommel's posthumous memoirs for its subtitle. - Rearrange as follows: "The historian Patrick Major points out that a recent work, the 2002 book Alamein: War without Hate by Colin Smith and John Bierman, borrowed the name of Rommel's posthumous memoirs for its subtitle."
According to Watson, the most dominant element is Rommel the Superior Soldier; the second being Rommel the Common Man; and the last one Rommel the Martyr. - Change semi-colons to commas
In his work Homo militaris: Perspektiven einer kritischen Militärsoziologie, the senior social scientist Ulrich vom Hagen offers a critical view of the (past and modern) use of Rommel's image, which was and is recognized by Germany's NATO partners, as the modern knight of the Bundeswehr, who was highly successful as an operator of military arts and embodied the apolitical, chivalrous soldier (with several leaders of the Bundeswehr like Helmut Willmann, Hartmut Bagger and Edgar Trost declaring him as their personal role model) as well as the combination between this image, the traditional Miles Christianus model, and the concept of "soldier-statesman" to promote their military sub-culture. - This is far too lengthy for one sentence. Please split into two or three separate ones.
Remy remarks that according to personal and official evidences, an incident (Rommel used tanks to threaten rebellious party members to protect a journey of Hitler), that has been used by Reuth and Irving to prove that Rommel came to Hitler's attention and became his escort in 1936, actually happened in 1939. - Perhaps the parenthetical should be made a note (also delete "a journey of" from the note). Even then, the sentence still has a tendency to run on. Perhaps it could be reworded as follows: "In addition, Reuth and Irving used a certain incident [note here] to prove that Rommel came to Hitler's attention and became his escort in 1936. However, Remy remarks that according to personal and official evidences, the event actually occurred in 1939."
According to Remy, in 1936... - I think this would sound better if the order was switched ("In 1936, according to Remy, ...")
Searle describes another of Young's assertions, that Rommel first became close to Hitler because Hitler had read Infantry Attacks and wanted to meet the author, in the fall of 1938, as "patently untrue", casting doubts on the rest of Young's narrative as it pertains to Rommel's relationship with the dictator. - I propose rearranging as follows: "Searle describes as "patently false" another of Young's assertions, namely the assertion that Rommel first became close to Hitler because Hitler had read Infantry Attacks and wanted to meet the author in the fall of 1938. This casts doubt on the rest of Young's narrative as it pertains to Rommel's relationship with the dictator."
Goebbels wrote in his diary Rommel "is ideologically sound..." - Add "that" between "diary" and "Rommel"
...and as beguiled by Hitler as steel filings by a magnet... Hitler was a bulwark against bolshevism, [Rommel] had told staff officers. - Space between "magnet" and "..."

@Biblioworm:

Done. K.e.coffman (talk) 05:18, 19 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

K.e.coffman, Biblioworm's last real edit was to this nomination back in August; would you like me to put this nomination back into the reviewing pool with no loss of seniority, so it is available for a new reviewer to select? Please let me know. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:59, 7 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@BlueMoonset: Yes, that would be great. The reviewing editor (Special:Contributions/Biblioworm) has not been on Wiki since Sept 10, so it looks like they are may be taking a Wiki break. K.e.coffman (talk) 17:07, 7 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

K.e.coffman, done. This is one of two reviews that Biblioworm left unfinished, unfortunately. BlueMoonset (talk) 17:22, 7 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]