Talk:Rescue of Jews by Poles during the Holocaust/GA1

GA Review

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

1. The lead is too short
2. The lead already raises a few red flags for POV - "extraordinarily cruel" is the first one. Secondly, wrt Nazis, if helping Jews is a capital crime, were those kind charitable people executed after a trial for this ridiculous law, because if they got a trial, then one has to use "executed for ...." rather than murdered.
3. Hmmm, some really sloppy stuff. Lots of uncleaned up footnotes and punctutation ".[45]." and what have you.
4. Footnotes, books written out in full multiple times instead of being moved once to a booklist. Also, what about books with no page numbers to specify the exact location of the information
5. Unfromatted URL refs...

YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 06:33, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

• Will this be transcluded on article's talk? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 03:32, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Is that mandatory. A lot of reviews of mine were not. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 01:27, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

-... people executed after a trial for this ridiculous law, because if they got a trial, then one has to use executed for .... rather than murdered - there was no trial, people were simply murdered on the spot.--Jacurek (talk) 12:38, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Right, just because it was made "officially" against the law does not imply that those who were caught helping automatically got the right to due process, or a right of appeal or any other right. The law basically meant that they could be shot on the spot (i.e. murdered) and whoever did it was immune from any kind of punishment.radek (talk)

• This article was a subject of a fierce edit war conducted by a banned user, and—as is the case with all such articles—it was basically ripped apart with a number of paragraphs permanently disfigured with citations promoting ethnic strife and racial hatred between Polish nationals, which were reverted back and forth endless times. As a result, there’s a lot of repetition and deficient discourse in it. I see this GA review as the opportunity to bring this article back to acceptable standards. However, more detailed analysis would be much appreciated, because working on specifics is the only way to avoid further flare-up between various camps. --Poeticbent talk 19:48, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Is it going to be revamped then? The references are still all over the place and the prose is still quite poor in some places, I see some of the edits have noted this in the edit summery. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 05:49, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

I've failed it/ YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 23:18, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

I've rewritten the lead; hopefully now it is more comprehensive and neutral.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 17:53, 18 February 2009 (UTC)