Template:Did you know nominations/Ivanhorod Einsatzgruppen photograph, 1942
- 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 Flibirigit (talk) 14:34, 21 November 2018 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Ivanhorod Einsatzgruppen photograph, 1942
[edit]
Einsatzgruppen murder Jews in Ivanhorod, Ukraine
... that the site of the execution captured in this iconic Holocaust photograph became a Soviet collective farm?Source: "You are strongly encouraged to quote the source text supporting each hook" (and [link] the source, or cite it briefly without using citation templates)- ALT1:
... that German conservatives claimed that an iconic Holocaust photograph depicting the murder of Jews in Ivanhorod, Ukraine, was a Communist forgery?Source: "You are strongly encouraged to quote the source text supporting each hook" (and [link] the source, or cite it briefly without using citation templates)
- ALT1:
- Reviewed: Rachel Shapira
- Comment: The image has already been used in a previous DYK, but the article is new. I don't know what that means for eligibility. It doesn't make sense to run the hook without the image.
Created by Catrìona (talk). Self-nominated at 02:37, 29 September 2018 (UTC).
Date, size, refs, neutrality, copyvio check, all pass. GTG. Alt1 seems more interesting then the main hook; it is common for sites of battlefields and massacres and such to be repurposed, barring most famous ones. Strongly endorse for inclusion with a picture. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 11:07, 1 October 2018 (UTC)
Pulled from queue per discussion at WT:DYK#Pulled another one as well. Yoninah (talk) 18:42, 7 November 2018 (UTC)
- @Yoninah: The article initially based the wording from this source "Incredibly, when the photograph was used in a book published by the Soviet-installed Polish communist regime after the war, a right-wing West German newspaper, Deutsche Soldaten Zeitung, ran a headline above it "Achtung Fälschung" (beware falsification)." Personally, I don't agree with the criticism; the hook does not assert that all German conservatives agreed with this viewpoint but that some clearly did. If the allegations really became a "press war", that strongly suggests that coverage went beyond fringe sources. Catrìona (talk) 19:43, 7 November 2018 (UTC)
- It seems that the issue is with attributing the view to "German conservatives". CDU would be a conservative party, i.e. firmly in the mainstream. Perhaps change the hook to "...that a West German fringe publication claimed that an iconic Holocaust photograph..." or "...that a right-wing newspaper in West Germany claimed that ...". K.e.coffman (talk) 01:48, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
- Both of those seem acceptable. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 03:00, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
- It seems that the issue is with attributing the view to "German conservatives". CDU would be a conservative party, i.e. firmly in the mainstream. Perhaps change the hook to "...that a West German fringe publication claimed that an iconic Holocaust photograph..." or "...that a right-wing newspaper in West Germany claimed that ...". K.e.coffman (talk) 01:48, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
- ALT2: ... that a right-wing West German newspaper claimed that an iconic Holocaust photograph depicting the murder of Jews in Ivanhorod, Ukraine, was a Communist forgery?
- I think that the descriptor "right-wing" is more appropriate than "fringe"; both sources describe it as right-wing but neither describes it as "fringe". Catrìona (talk) 03:08, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
- While I think that ALT2 is fine and perhaps better, as in more explicit and clear, it would be good to have another editor review this. Perhaps User:Icewhiz or User:K.e.coffman would like to comment? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 04:01, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
- I think this is OK. Misses the context this was in 1959 around initial publication of this (by the communist regime), and that such issues have been found in other photos, e.g. Wehrmachtsausstellung - but this is a hook and is supposed to be hooky.Icewhiz (talk) 04:58, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
- While I think that ALT2 is fine and perhaps better, as in more explicit and clear, it would be good to have another editor review this. Perhaps User:Icewhiz or User:K.e.coffman would like to comment? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 04:01, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
- Works for me. K.e.coffman (talk) 23:28, 12 November 2018 (UTC)