Talk:Dora trial

Article Creation

The German version is rated "Excellent", so my plan is to translate carefully to retain intent and citations. I will make mods for clarity, wikification, English encyclopedic style, and word flow between sections. Because the original is very large I started it as a stub - when complete I'll comment here. Ultracobalt (talk) 22:54, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

translation

Could someone translate the roles of the accused ? I am not a german speaker, so would be uncomfortable copying from altafista. --RichardMills65 (talk) 07:38, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Oops I forgot that part. I reworked the table of the accused, did I get the information translated you were referring to? -- Ultracobalt (talk) 08:49, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Translation Finished

With same tables, photos, references as original. The 51 refs are also in same order so reviewers can make comparisons, but they are not formatted consistently in the original so a detail-oriented person should go thru and fix up. I expanded the summary, added subsection headings, and more wikilinks also. The article is now READY for review. --- Ultracobalt (talk) 13:10, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for quick review! I went thru it again to: touch up word flow, add a final short section from original with new ref, format bibliography (but not inline refs) to Chicago Style, add external links, add categories, add standard nav boxes to end. It should now be ready for submission to GA. --- Ultracobalt (talk) 22:39, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Dora Trial/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Ealdgyth (talk · contribs) 20:19, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

I'll be reviewing this shortly. Ealdgyth - Talk 20:19, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

   Some spots where the meaning isn't clear. Also some inconsistency in date treatment.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

Lead:

• "Dora was the last of a sequence of proceedings which took place in the context of the Dachau Trials relating to wide-ranging war crimes uncovered by the United States in its zone of occupation at the end of World War II." ouch - very jargony - suggest "Dora was the last proceeding in a series known as the Dachau Trials which dealt with war crimes uncovered by the United States in its zone of occupation at the end of World War II."
• Okay, you say it was the last proceeding and then you say there were more after???
• "Violent crimes still extant in the the body of the facts resulted in several more trials of individual cases in both West Germany and East Germany." HUH? I think you mean "Other violent crimes committed at the camp later resulted in several more trials of individual cases in both West Germany and East Germany."?

Background:

• You used August 7, 1947 in the lead but 11 April 1945 in this section. Decide on a date format and be consistent.
• You link "SS-Totenkopfverbände" but can we put it in English - this is the English wikipedia after all, not German.
• Why is "Investigating Team 6822," in italics?
• Link for "U.S. War Crimes Program"?
• "Corresponding demands to the Soviet military administration remained mostly unanswered." Corresponding demands for what?? I do not parse this sentence at all.
• Cite for "Those Mittelbau-Dora suspects and evidence that were in U.S. custody were finally incorporated into the framework of the Dachau Trials."?

Legal basis:

• "German perpetrators of crimes on German victims remained long unpunished and were usually only later heard in German courts." ... do you mean "German perpetrators of crimes on German victims remained long unpunished and were usually only later tried in German courts."?
• Why is "Common Design" in italics?

Participants:

• What difference to the trial does the fact that "Aalmans produced a booklet entitled the "Dora"-Nordhausen Labor-Concentration Camps" have? It's totally unrelated to anything before or after .. it jars.
• What is GmbH?
• Is the gallery of defendants REALLY needed? It takes up an insane amount of space for little gain.
• "U.S." or "US"? Decide on one and be consistent.

Trial:

• Why is "evacuation of the camp" in scare quotes? You did this earlier...

Later Mittelbau:

• "violent crimes still extant in the body of facts resulted" jargon - you need to reword this to not be lawyer-speak

I've put the article on hold for seven days to allow folks to address the issues I've brought up. Feel free to contact me on my talk page, or here with any concerns, and let me know one of those places when the issues have been addressed. If I may suggest that you strike out, check mark, or otherwise mark the items I've detailed, that will make it possible for me to see what's been addressed, and you can keep track of what's been done and what still needs to be worked on. Ealdgyth - Talk 20:56, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Anyone home? If I don't get some movement shortly on these issues, I'm going to have to fail the article. Ealdgyth - Talk 01:56, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

I've seen no progress on these issues and some of them I'm not competent to do myself so I'm going to have to fail the article. Ealdgyth - Talk 17:43, 12 April 2012 (UTC)