Talk:Belgian Resistance/GA1

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: Retrolord (talk · contribs) 10:03, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

More Belgium WW2 ones :P. I'm happy to review it ★★Retro Lord ★★ 10:03, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Retro, thanks for doing this! --Brigade Piron (talk) 14:39, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"Armée Secrète" What is this? It seems to start getting mentioned about halfway through the article. What is it? ★★Retro Lord ★★ 10:10, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There's an article (Armée Secrète) on the subject which I have linked to.

" Within Belgium, resistance was fragmented between a large number of different organizations, divided by regional and political stance, which, aside from sabotage of military infrastructure in the country and assassinations of collaborators, also published underground newspapers, gathered intelligence and maintained various escape networks that helped Allied airmen trapped behind enemy lines" That is quite the sentence. Could you please split it in two parts? ★★Retro Lord ★★ 19:07, 27 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, bad habit of mine! I've introduced a false stop so it's half as long. ---Brigade Piron (talk) 08:11, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Question, why doesn't the article mention the Brigade Piron? Is an article about the belgian resistance complete without mentioning them? Happy to hear if you disagree though. ★★Retro Lord ★★ 18:24, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Retro! No not at all! The Resistance is about the opposition to the Nazis inside occupied Belgium - the Brigade Piron should be covered in Free Belgian Forces which I hope also to work on in due course.--Brigade Piron (talk) 18:50, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ok,i'm pretty happy with this article as a whole, give me a chance to go over it again entirely and then i'll pass it. ★★Retro Lord ★★ 19:25, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Great, thanks!--Brigade Piron (talk) 08:06, 29 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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.	"were responsible" Was responsible? Done!
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.
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.	"However, the committee was rendered redundant by the liberation in September." Ref? I would assume that this is fairly evident, though I can reference it. Since coordinating the resistance is only necessary when there is resistance, and there is only resistance when there is something so resist - after liberation there's not much point! Ok, thats fine then. "The danger of infiltration posed by German informants meant that some cells were extremely small and local, and although nation-wide groups did exist, they were split along political and ideological lines." Ref? Done! "King Leopold III, imprisoned in the palace in Laeken, became a focal point for passive resistance, despite having been condemned by the government-in-exile for his decision to surrender." Ref? Done! "Today the role of the resistance during the conflict is commemorated by memorials, plaques and road names across the country." Ref? Done!
	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).
	2c. it contains no original research.
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).	"(including two generals)" A bit of an uneccessary detail methinks I don't know actually - generals are usually regarded as more prestigious prisoners! ---Brigade Piron (talk) 14:39, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply] "members across occupied Europe and also in Belgium." Can you rewrite this so the sentence is focused purely on Belgium? Done!
	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.