Talk:Squatting in Hamburg

Squatting in Hamburg has been listed as one of the Social sciences and society good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Review: June 6, 2022. (Reviewed version).

A fact from Squatting in Hamburg appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 18 February 2022 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that squatters in Hamburg briefly occupied the former Erotic Art Museum?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2022/February. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Squatting in Hamburg.

Wikipedia

Germany: Hamburg Low‑importance

	Germany portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Germany on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GermanyWikipedia:WikiProject GermanyTemplate:WikiProject GermanyGermany
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Hamburg portal This article is supported by the Hamburg task force.

Squatting High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Squatting, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of squatting on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SquattingWikipedia:WikiProject SquattingTemplate:WikiProject Squattingsquatting
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Did you know nomination

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: promoted by Theleekycauldron (talk) 10:27, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(

Comment or view
Article history

)

The Erotic Art Museum in Hamburg

... that squatters in Hamburg briefly occupied the former Erotic Art Museum? Source: https://taz.de/!427480/ : In der Nacht zu Sonntag dringen Gentrifizierungsgegner in das ehemalige Erotic Art Museum in der Bernhard-Nocht-Straße ein und errichten Strassenbarrikaden. Die Polizei räumte das Gebäude : "On Sunday night, opponents of gentrification invaded the former Erotic Art Museum in Bernhard-Nocht-Straße and set up street barricades. The police cleared the building"
- ALT1: ... that squatters in the former Erotic Art Museum in Hamburg were quickly evicted? Source: https://taz.de/!427480/ : In der Nacht zu Sonntag dringen Gentrifizierungsgegner in das ehemalige Erotic Art Museum in der Bernhard-Nocht-Straße ein und errichten Strassenbarrikaden. Die Polizei räumte das Gebäude : "On Sunday night, opponents of gentrification invaded the former Erotic Art Museum in Bernhard-Nocht-Straße and set up street barricades. The police cleared the building"

Moved to mainspace by Mujinga (talk). Self-nominated at 11:09, 8 February 2022 (UTC).[reply]

QPQ: Template:Did you know nominations/Albert Freedman Mujinga (talk) 11:11, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook eligibility:

Cited:
Interesting:
Other problems:

Image: Image is freely licensed, used in the article, and clear at 100px.
Freely licensed: Used in article: Clear at 100px:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: Article is new enough, long enough and well sourced. It seems neutral and well written. Both hooks are cited and interesting. Earwig didn't detect any copyvio (although a lot of the sources aren't in English anyway) and qpq has been provided. The photo is free, easy to see at 100px and is in the article. This one's all ready! BuySomeApples (talk) 19:19, 10 February 2022 (UTC) To T:DYK/P5[reply]

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Squatting in Hamburg/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Shushugah (talk · contribs) 16:36, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Review

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.	I've directly fixed a few grammatical mistakes, but they're few/minor.
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	The structure is chronological and reasonable, with further readings below reference/see also sections.
2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.	Indeed.
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).	Yes. In general, all the sources are high quality, with a number of books, and several newspaper articles.
	2c. it contains no original research.	None that I could find.
	2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
	7. Overall assessment.

General comments:

Wikilink Volxkuche
Properly attribute the two authors Karl-Heinz Dellwo and Willi Baerof the book "Wir wollen alles – Die Hausbesetzungen in Hamburg" with their names instead of "Various"
Legalized is a technical/legal concept that is mentioned several times, but not explained.

Possible copyright violation

It passes copyvio check. Because it's a translated article, I also checked whether attribution was provided. While this article is quite different from the German one, it is a derivative, using same images/sources in various cases. This would be fixed with a talk page template {{Translated page}}. Further instructions available at Help:Translate.

I will give a week before I mark it as succeeded/failed, unless you're actively working on it, in which case I will give more time to address my feedback. Looking forward to working with you! ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 16:36, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Replies

Thanks for taking this on! Mujinga (talk) 20:36, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Wow that's great Volxkuche is linked, I should work on that page though, it's not in great condition. Mujinga (talk) 20:36, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Refs for wir wollen alles fixed Mujinga (talk) 21:07, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Add wikilinks for legalized (and housing co-operative). Not sure what else to add, since it seems to me a commonplace term. Mujinga (talk) 21:07, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure about adding {{Translated page}} since I wouldn't say I've translated text per WP:TFOLWP. I did of course look at the German language page for inspiration, but it's not very well referenced and it's more of a list article, so I wouldn't say I actually translated any of it. I have used some of the same sources and images that is correct but I don't think that requires attribution on my understanding. Also, I did note in the history that I imported text from the EN article on Rote Flora. Mujinga (talk) 21:27, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I hope I've answered everything Mujinga (talk) 21:28, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Shushugah just checking you've seen this Mujinga (talk) 10:21, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the ping and the satisfactory explanations/follow up edits Mujinga. Congrats on the GA status! ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 10:34, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]