Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Hyacinth Graf Strachwitz von Groß-Zauche und Camminetz

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article promoted Hawkeye7 (talk) 19:59, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator(s): MisterBee1966 (talk)


I am nominating this article for A-Class review because it recently underwent a peer review and GA review. No major concerns have been flagged so far. Please share your feedback. Thanks MisterBee1966 (talk) 16:27, 17 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comments Support:

  • "Strachwitz was appointed ordnance officer." - it would be worth adding "in his unit" or something like that, or "was appointed as an ordnance officer"; at first, I assumed that this meant he was some sort of national-level ordnance officer.
  • " NSDAP" - I'd go for calling this the Nazi party, as you do in the later text (more readers will recognise it by that name)
  • "By the time of his release, " - I'd add the year in here, as you can't deduce it from context.
  • "He had an older sister, Aloysia (1892–1972), followed by his younger brother Johannes (1896–1917) nicknamed "Ceslaus", his sister Elisabeth (1897–1992), his brother Manfred (1899–1972), his brother Mariano (1902–22), and his youngest sister Margarethe (1905–1989)" - Personally, I'm not convinced the dates add much - but they do make the sentence harder to read.
  • "After one year at Avignon he was put in a German uniform and taken to Fort Barraux." - worth adding that the Fort was a prisoner of war facility?
  • "He returned to Berlin via Konstanz," - repetition of "returned", which was also used in the previous sentence
  • "Also his father had to go to prison." - this sentence felt a bit jarring to me (and it was also unclear why the son's actions resulted in the father's imprisonment)
  • " He believed that only the Italians had played an honest and neutral role in the situation." - in the situation? Not sure if this meant the war, the events of 1919, or something else.
  • "The conflict pinnacled " - "At the peak of the conflict"?
  • "In the belief that he could better politically represent his Upper Silesian agricultural and forestry interests, he applied for membership in the Nazi Party" - how good is the sourcing for this? I'm not an expert on this officer or on Rolls (the cited source), but I'm always a little nervous about how we assess the explanations that people gave for joining the Nazi Party - particularly when they were fairly right wing individuals to start with, by the sounds of it, and then joined the SS. Are you confident that this is a genuinely fair assessment of why he joined the party?
  • Good question! I would point out that the picture that the author draws is that of a national conservative and not right wing individual. The reason Röll states is exactly what I wrote in the article. To lessen the emphasis of the wording I suggest to write that he joined the Nazi Party and put the reason in footnote stating "According to Röll Strachwitz joined the ..." Would this work for you? MisterBee1966 (talk) 08:02, 22 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • "General Kirchner received the order for Fall Gelb..." I was having trouble working out what Strachwitz was doing during the events of this and the following paragraph. Is there anyway of pulling out more about his role?

Support Comments

[edit]
Added my support now. Anotherclown (talk) 05:35, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

question Before at some point the reviewers cast their final verdict on this article I would truly like some very generic feedback on this article. I worked over a year on this. I found it very challenging at times to cover such a wide variety of historic events, condense the information and put it into perspective so that the reader can follow and understand this biography (so I hope). It also required a lot of translation and investigation to find the correct and sematic English representation. Most of the feedback I received so far very much focusses on my linguistic limitations, not that I mind that, on the contrary. But what I truly wish to read from you reviewers: does this make sense to you and is the information at the right level of detail? Thanks MisterBee1966 (talk) 18:11, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I think the article is very good on this count (and I would guess the others agree, which is why we're picking on small details for the most part). The only thing that really caught my eye was the background to the outbreak of war in 1914, which I mentioned above. Parsecboy (talk) 13:32, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.