GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Navinsingh133 (talk · contribs) 11:58, 16 October 2017 (UTC)
I am currently reviewing this article as a qualified reviewer.
This article is nicely and neatly written, but may need a little more grammatical work(use of articles, spacing, etc.), layout(# See also) and content expanding. Will fix minor errors my self!
British English is acceptable(such as minimise).
I believe that this article passes GA Criteria 4,5,6 clearly, and 1b,2,3 are almost acceptable. However,1a needs slight work and 2b,2c,2d, and 3a are not verified by me yet(references are not easily accessible). Perhaps it will be better if some online reliable references are added(I will try to do it myself!).
Thank you, Navinsingh133 (talk) 11:58, 16 October 2017 (UTC)
This article is reassessed and I believe that This article passes GA criteria 1a, 2a, 2b, 3b, 4, 5, 6 clearly, and rest are acceptable for the GA standard. The article also holds promises of detailed expansion in near future. Therefore I believe it should be a pass. However, Just one person cannot give accurate review(and more time should be given), therefore I am inviting other reviewers to take a look at the article. Till then, I see no problem in keeping it in a good article(or at least B) category. --Navinsingh133 (talk) 09:14, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
This is still listed as an active review. Given the comparative inexperience of the editor at the time this was opened—about six weeks of Wikipedia editing and fewer than 200 total edits—I have taken the liberty of changing the status from "onreview" to "2ndopinion" in the hopes that a more experienced reviewer can check and see whether the article does indeed meet the GA criteria. As it is a technical article, someone who is good with such prose would be a plus. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 00:26, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
Table of Contents
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. | ✓ The issues of grammar have been corrected. | |
1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. | ✓ The article complies with WP:MOS. | |
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. | ✓ | |
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). | ✓ Source was updated. | |
2c. it contains no original research. | ✓ The nominated article does not contain original research (the mistakenly cited passages mentioned above not included.) | |
2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism. | ✓ In the sources I personally checked, I encountered no evidence of plagiarism. | |
3. Broad in its coverage: | ||
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic. | ✓The main topic is addressed. | |
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style). | ✓The details of air stripline versus other kinds of stripline were delineated. This was remedied by the grammar changes in section 1a, and the source No. III integrity changes in 2a and 2b. | |
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each. | ✓ The article does not display any bias. | |
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. | ✓ There does not seem to be a problem with reverting. | |
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. | ✓Both images are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 License. Attribution: Courtesy Spinningspark at Wikipedia. Neither file meets CSD F8. | |
6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. | ✓Captions appear to be pertinent. | |
7. Overall assessment. | ✓Improvements have been made and all areas are completed. As the second review opinion, I concur with the previous reviewer's hastily made, yet essentially correct assessment that this article passes GA status. |
"High end designs may use a crystalline substrate, such as boron nitride or sapphire, as the suspended substrate."
"This also makes mechanical support easier because the lines are more rigid."11
"Design Data on Edge Coupled Stripline-like Transmission Lines—Characteristic Impedances and Effective Dielectric Constants."[1]: 212 That page delineates coupled line configurations, in particular, the edge-coupled parallel conductor configuration. Bhat discusses how these circuits adopt either the edge-coupled homogeneous stripline or edge-coupled microstrip line and how a few adopt edge-coupled suspended striplines
"especially at higher microwave frequencies."[1]: 212 Bhat then goes on to describe how Matthaei (the author of the book reviewed below, after this one) has provided complete design curves characterizing the various fringe capacitances and also formulas for determining the structural parameters from
"even-and-odd mode impedances."[1]: 212
"Broadside coupled suspended stripline using uniaxially anisotropic pyrolytic boron nitride or sapphire as the suspended dielectric layer is attractive in the design of filters and high directivity tight couplers demanding highly reproducible characteristics.[1]: 302
"Characteristic impedances Ze and Zo and phase velocity ratio vo/ve versus w/b and d/b as parameter of broadside coupled homogeneous stripline filled with uniaxially anisotropic dielectric substrate pyrolytic boron nitride."[1]: 303
"The point of an inline citation is to allow readers and other editors to check that the material is sourced; that point is lost if the citation is not clearly placed."These guidelines clearly leave the final decision on the distance
"between material and its source"in the hands of
"editorial judgment", advising that editors
"exercise caution when rearranging or inserting material to ensure that text–source relationships are maintained."In the nominated article, reference #11's placement is assumed to be meant as reference for the entire paragraph, when considering that the final sentence in which it appears is too particular a statement, and not broad enough, to warrant a reference covering 18 pages of material. The guidelines state:
"If a sentence or paragraph is footnoted with a source, adding new material that is not supported by the existing source to the sentence/paragraph, without a source for the new text, is highly misleading if placed to appear that the cited source supports it. When new text is inserted into a paragraph, make sure it is supported by the existing (source) or a new source."Taking that guideline into consideration it is my opinion that the material in this paragraph, and the reference note #11 meant as the source citation for it, does not meet an acceptable threshold for text–source integrity. This many pages of material pressed into one note is odd (pages 212, 280–287, and 302–311) and the fact that other parts of the nominated article easily possess text–source integrity (see analysis no.4, below) makes the inability of reference note #11 in meeting an acceptable threshold for text–source integrity all the more puzzling. 18 pages worth of material should have easily broken down into several different reference notes across 10 sentences, and yet these pages weren't separated. Looking at WP:INTEGRITY, one sees that the standard for text–source integrity is "editor's judgment." An editor who asks for 10 paragraphs in their article to be allowed with only one citation would doubtless be pressing their luck. My question asks where the line should be drawn. At what point does a Good Article nominee begin to press their luck, at 10 paragraphs or 10 sentences? The guidance that citations be bundled into one reference placed at the end of a paragraph (WP:SCICITE) appear to apply in certain cases:
Which of these two policies WP:INTEGRITY or WP:SCICITE is felt to take precedence here and ought to be implemented should be for the article's nominator to decide.The verifiability criteria require that such statements be sourced so that in principle anyone can verify them. However, in many articles it is cumbersome to provide an in-line reference for every statement ... therefore, in sections or articles that present well-known and uncontroversial information – information that is readily available in most common and obvious books on the subject – it is acceptable to give an inline citation for one or two authoritative sources in such a way as to indicate that these sources can be checked to verify statements for which no other in-line citation is provided. These inline citations are often inserted either after the first sentence of a paragraph or after the last sentence of the paragraph.
For this reason stripline parallel coupled lines are used in directional couplers with a coupling factor no more than −10 dB but power splitters (coupling factor −3 dB) use a direct coupling technique. In air stripline there is another possibility, the lines can be stacked one on top of the other."should be changed to:
"For this reason, stripline parallel coupled lines are used in directional couplers with a coupling factor no more than −10 dB. Power splitters, with their coupling factor −3 dB, use a direct coupling technique. Air stripline makes use of an alternative arrangement, with lines stacked one atop of the other."
"The average power, P (measured in kw), that can be transmitted along a matched strip line having an inner conductor with rounded corners is plotted in Fig 5.04-5. In this figure, the ground plane spacing b is measured in inches, and the breakdown strength of air is taken as 2.9 x 104 volts/cm."[2]: 172
"...insulators are electrically undesirable..."). (Note: If by "undesirability" it means that the transmission line becomes damaged or destroyed, then this reference as it's worded is acceptable.)
"Provide further reading enabling other editors to verify and to extend the given information, as well as to discuss the quality of a particular source."It should be the case that when the use of figures from a source are required to cite a reference for text in an article, those very same figures ought to be reproduced and included in the article. However, MOS:MATHS warns that
"Wikipedia articles cannot be a substitute for a textbook. Also, often one might want to find out more details (like the proof of a theorem stated in the article)."There is also direction from WP:SCICITE which states that formulas or calculations are allowed when they involve:
In the Matthaei source many of these formulas are used as a reference, although their details are not expounded upon as WP:SCICITE suggests.Converting units, rounding to appropriate levels of precision for the article, describing quantitative relationships in words, and other simple methods that both accurately describe the information from the source(s) and do not tend to advance a novel argument. If a calculation, although routine, takes more than one or two steps, it may be helpful to present the details of the calculation in a note to the text.
"dielectric supported stripline (also called a suspended stripline or suspended substrip), where the strip conductor is deposited on a thin dielectric substrate, sometimes on both sides and connected together to form a single conductor."
"has now been superseded bymicrostrip [sic] for most general purpose applications."
"they removed the side walls altogether and extended the top and bottom walls sideways. The result was called a strip transmission line or stripline. Different methods were used by different companies to support the center strip, but in all cases the region between the two outer plates was filled with only a single medium, either dielectric material or air."[3]: 557 Oliner then goes on to describe how a modification that emerged at roughly the same time involved removing the top plate and leaving only the strip and the bottom plate, called a microstrip. Page 557 then goes on to list Robert M. Barret as the inventor of the stripline concept, and how his work went on to inform the work carried out by three organizations, namely, the Polytechnic Institute of Brooklyn, Tufts College, and Airborne Instruments Laboratories (AIL).[3]: 557 The bottom of page 557 shows sketches of two commercial microwave printed circuits.[3]: 557
"in all cases, the region between the two outer plates was filled with only a SINGLE medium, EITHER dielectric material OR air."[3]: 557 If this is the case that an air stripline is a stripline where the region between the two outer plates is filled with air and a dielectric substrate stripline is one which is filled with dielectric substrate, then the nominated article's claim that the two basic ways of constructing an air stripline involving one way which does not utilize air (the dielectric substrate) is a spurious claim.
"The unadorned term stripline would now likely be assumed to be stripline with a solid dielectric."should be changed to:
"The unadorned term stripline is now likely assumed to be a stripline with a solid dielectric."
References
Spintendo ᔦᔭ 19:09, 27 December 2017 (UTC)
"Different methods were used by different companies to support the center strip, but in all cases the region between the two outer outer plate was filled (or effectively filled) with only a single medium, either dielectric material or air"and later
"...(b) is clearly dielectric filled, whereas that in (c) is essentially air-filled because very little field is present in the thin center sheet that supports the center strip."(my emphasis) --catslash (talk) 22:42, 5 January 2018 (UTC)
Thanks to user:Catslash for addressing some of these issues. Am I right in thinking that the all the remaining issues are to be found under "analysis and recommendations" for the Bhat and Matthaei sources? SpinningSpark 16:41, 7 January 2018 (UTC)
"make the dielectric essentially air"
So it is air, or not? What is this "essentially"? Maury Markowitz (talk) 17:17, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Spintendo (talk · contribs) 16:28, 5 January 2018 (UTC)
(Please note: I noticed you have another article undergoing GA review. I can wait until that process has completed before we begin here. Please advise.)
I am delighted to begin this review. Although your nomination has only been active for 5 days, in the end it's the content of the article and not the timeframe of the nomination that matters. While the system indicates that this is my first review, it will, in fact, be my second review — as I took over for Navinsingh133 five days into their review of Air stripline after that article's nominator asked for a second opinion.
The structure of my review will be the following. As I examine the article, my comments for improvement will be listed under the Q&A heading, allowing for space for your responses posted immediately following mine. Each entry I make in the Q&A section will be prefaced with one of two codes:
After the Q&A section is completed, I will then fill out the chart below and finish the process, which should take no more than 7 days on my end. The Q&A section will begin immediately following this introduction. Until the end of the process, let's push the Review table to the bottom with whatever text we enter, so that our Q&A stays near the top. That way, we'll minimize the time spent having to scroll down past the review box every time to fill in information. When Q&A is completed, I will move the review table back up here to the beginning. Please feel free to enter any introductory comments you may have just below here, before the Q&A section. Spintendo ᔦᔭ 16:28, 5 January 2018 (UTC)
Task complete.
dealing with the High Command Trial of 1947-1948.The first sentence the dates should contain the {{ndash}} parameter as 1947{{ndash}}1948
_____________________________________________________________________
The author, Valerie Hébert, is an associate professor of history and interdisciplinary studies...should omit
"Valerie Hébert is an associate..."
_____________________________________________________________________
the quest for justice by the American prosecutors and their attempt to usecomma after prosecutors
_____________________________________________________________________
"finds the book a "welcome addition to this literature" as it focuses on a trial that has so far been neglected".remove the quotation marks after the word literature.
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
in the criminality of the Nazi regime.[2]should list the actual page as 734 for the source, this being where that information is coming from. I suggest using {{rp|734}}.
_____________________________________________________________________
The book devotes considerable time to the prosecution's case, presented by Chief of Counsel for the Prosecution Telford Taylor, the defence's case, and the court's ruling.should be two sentences. Replace the comma after Taylor with a period. The plural of defence is defence (which is spelled defense in American English) so change the second sentence to say "The defence case and the Court's subsequent ruling, are also covered." (As there is already the British English usage of "behaviour" lower in the next paragraphs, sticking with "defence" is appropriate)
______________________________________________________________________
The book devotes considerable time to the prosecution's case, presented by Chief of Counsel for the Prosecution Telford Taylor.chief of counsel should be lowercase, and delete "for the Prosecution" after it, as the word prosecution is already used in the same sentence.
______________________________________________________________________
While the evidence of the specific war crimes and crimes against humanity committed by the accused was damningdelete "the" after "While".
______________________________________________________________________
the book finds that it was the defence, not the prosecution, that set the tone of how the trial and the judgement were perceived in Germany.This text is insufficiently paraphrased from the source material (see WP:CLOP) and is a serious violation of WP:C. I strongly suggest that it be rephrased in your own words. For reference, the text originated at the very top of page 736 of the Pendas source.
_______________________________________________________________________
"In two particularly interesting and important chapters (two and six), Hébert analyzes German reactions to the Nuremberg trials in general and to the High Command Case in particular. What is striking in her account is the ways in which, contrary to American hopes and expectations, it was the defense, rather than the prosecution, that set the tone for public perceptions of the Nuremberg trials."
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
She points out the failure of the American authorities to publish the trial materials in GermanThis claim is not mentioned in any of the sources given. This becomes problematic when you consider GAR# 9 below. As it originates with the book, the book should be given as reference for this claim, along with the page number from the book for this claim.
"...although it concludes with a fascinating discussion of the American failure to publish the trial proceedings in German. This is a subject which possibly deserved more attention, since, as Hébert mentions earlier in this chapter, the withholding of the trial documents worked against the US occupation officials in Germany. Many of the Germans protesting against the verdicts changed their tune when they discovered what the proceedings had involved."
________________________________________________________________________
She points out the failure of the American authorities to publish the trial materials in German, which may have led in part to the Americans' failure in their didactic goals.is problematic because it states 2 things: (A) the publishing of records not in German, (B) this publishing not in German leading to failure of "didactic goals". While the Pendas source does mention "Didactic" goals, Pendas does not link a failure of language translation as the cause of this missed goal.
_____________________________________________________________________
extensive record of Wehrmacht's criminal behaviourinsert "the" before Wehrmacht.
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
"The reviewer note(d) that by providing more background on the German military organization, the author "could have supplied a clearer portrait of the involvement of the Wehrmacht leadership in Nazi macro-criminality".should be changed to "The reviewer note(d) that by NOT providing more background on the German..." The full Sagasser quote is:
Although the material here is well-researched, it is a pity that Hébert does not discuss the military organization of Nazi Germany ... Hébert could have supplied a clearer portrait of the involvement of the Wehrmacht leadership in Nazi macro-criminality.: 523
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
Text as it appears in the Wikipedia article |
Text as it appears in the Source Material |
---|---|
"Unlike other academic books on war crimes trials, that could be 'longwinded affairs, written by lawyers, this book has achieved a distinction rare in this field' in that it can be recommended for teaching purposes." | "Since many of the academic studies dealing with war crimes trials are long-winded affairs, written by lawyers, this book has achieved a distinction rare in this field: it can be recommended unhesitatingly for seminar reading lists and teaching purposes."[1]: 277 |
References
_____________________________________________________________________
the reviewer notes that Hébert's book analyses a single trialchange "Hébert's book analyses a single trial" to "Hébert's book analysed a single trial"
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
Text as it appears in the Wikipedia article |
Text as it appears in the Source Material |
---|---|
"Nonetheless, the trial provided an extensive record of Wehrmacht's criminal behaviour during the war." | "...the positive effects of the trial in providing an extensive record of Wehrmacht criminal behaviour during the war."[1]: 277 |
References
____________________________________________________________________________
"the book finds that it was the defence that won the case in the court of Germany's public opinion."There is a big difference between the failure of affect upon a trial's perception in people's minds (i.e., "the American's trials, because of translation difficulties, stopped short of convincing us of their absolute necessity") versus a definite move to the win column (i.e., "the American's trials were a waste of time and the completely wrong thing to do.") Those are two different states of mind, and the statement that they "won the case" seems to swing the perception all the way to the other side, one that the reviewer's words don't seem to imply.
References
Deferred
____________________________________________________________________________
References
____________________________________________________________________________
The following is a paragraph from the article with multiple issues, so I copied the text and placed marks where the issues are.
A review in the Journal of Genocide Research finds the book a "welcome addition to this literature, [as it] focuses on a trial that has so far been neglected".[1] According to Segasser, if Hébert had provided more info on the German military organization, she "could have supplied a clearer portrait of the involvement of the Wehrmacht leadership in Nazi macro-criminality".ref note needed The review agrees with Hébert in that Americans did not achieve their goals:[1]
...but it must be remembered that the trials of German military figures between 1945 and 1949 brought to light many documents of inestimable value to historians (as in the Wehrmacht exhibition of the 1990s). Thus, although most of the crimes of the Wehrmacht were forgotten in the immediate wake of the proceedings, the didactic value of the High Command Trial was not completely lost.[1]
Reviewing the work, historian Alaric Searle notes the book's "success, with only 208 pages of text, [in] providing a readable, accessible, and tightly structured overview of an extremely complex case".ref note needed He contrasts it with other literature on war crimes trials which he describes as "longwinded affairs, written by lawyers" and recommends Hitler's Generals on Trial for teaching purposes.[2]
A review in H-Net (author's name) finds that the book "breaks new ground" and is "strongly recommended".ref note needed Comparing it to the 2008 collection of essays, Atrocities on Trial: Historical Perspectives on the Politics of Prosecuting War Crimes, edited by Patricia Heberer and Jürgen Matthäus, the reviewer notes that Hébert's book analysed a single trial, putting it into historical perspective. The reviewer goes on to describe the work as an "outstanding contribution" that "forces the reader to consider difficult questions on what humans owe to each other, how that is assessed, and how and when such a bill is paid".[3]
The underlined passage above is insufficiently paraphrased from the source material.
References
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
Done I believe I have addressed these. --K.e.coffman (talk) 02:29, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
In this section I point out some of the issues with the newly revised first section of the current article, which is shown in the expandable section below. In the second expandable section, I offer suggestions for how passages from the article may be rewritten.
Extended content
|
---|
Hitler's Generals on Trial: The Last War Crimes Tribunal at Nuremberg is a 2010 book by Canadian historian Valerie Hébert dealing with the High Command Trial of 1947–1948. The book covers the criminal case against the defendants, all high-ranking officers of the armed forces of Nazi Germany, as well as the wider societal and historical implications of the trial. The book received generally positive reviews for its mastery of the subject and thorough assessment of the legacy of the trial.
Using primary and secondary material, Hébert discusses the proceedings themselves, the evolution of the American judicial policy towards war crimes, the preceding trials, and the post-conviction developments. The book devotes considerable time to the prosecution's case, presented by Chief of Counsel Telford Taylor.[3] Hébert focuses in particular on the cases against senior field commanders Hermann Hoth, Georg von Küchler and Hans Reinhardt, along with Walter Warlimont and Hermann Reinecke who served in the OKW, German military's supreme command.[4]
Hébert then discusses the failure of the American authorities to publish the trial materials in German, which may have led in part to the Americans' failure to educate and convince the German public. In the conclusion, which reviewers have described as "thoughtful", the author points out the value of the trial in creating a comprehensive record of the Wehrmacht's crimes. On the other hand, Hébert does not see that the American prosecutors have achieved their goals and concludes that the justice was not served in the end.[6][3]
Reviewing Hitler's Generals on Trial in Military Review, Mark Montesclaros of the Army Command and General Staff College describes the book's treatment of the political context of the trial and subsequent developments as one of its "greatest insights".[8] He points out that American authorities in Germany were not only seeking justice but, at the same time, trying to rebuild the German society, conduct a de-Nazification program, and recruit West Germany into a military coalition in the face of the looming Cold war with the Soviet Union. Faced with these conflicting priorities, the Americans opted for the reconciliation with the former enemy, which included clemency programs for those convicted in war crimes trials. Mark Montesclaros "highly recommends" the book to those interested in international military justice and post-war developments in Germany.[8] Reviewing the work, historian Alaric Searle notes the book's "success, with only 208 pages of text, [in] providing a readable, accessible, and tightly structured overview of an extremely complex case".[6] He contrasts it with other literature on war crimes trials which he describes as "longwinded affairs, written by lawyers" and recommends Hitler's Generals on Trial for teaching purposes.[6] American scholar Jonathan Lurie, reviewing the book in H-Net, finds that it "breaks new ground" and is "strongly recommended".[9] Comparing it to the 2008 collection of essays, Atrocities on Trial: Historical Perspectives on the Politics of Prosecuting War Crimes, edited by Patricia Heberer and Jürgen Matthäus, which covered a number of war crimes trials, Lurie notes the strength of Hébert's book in thoroughly analysing a single case and its outcomes and lessons. He goes on to describe the work as an "outstanding contribution" that asks "difficult questions" about justice, retribution, and atonement.[9] References
|
Extended content
|
---|
Hitler's Generals on Trial: The Last War Crimes Tribunal at Nuremberg is a 2010 book by Canadian historian Valerie Hébert dealing with the High Command Trial of 1947–1948. The book covers the criminal case against the defendants, all high-ranking officers of the armed forces of Nazi Germany, as well as the wider societal and historical implications of the trial. The book received generally positive reviews for its mastery of the subject and thorough assessment of the legacy of the trial.
Prosecution and defence cases In covering one tactic shared by defence counsels from different trials, Hébert reviewed a memorandum put forth at the Nuremberg Trial. Co-authored by former head of the OKH (German Army High Command) Franz Halder and former field marshals Walter von Brauchitsch and Erich von Manstein and other senior military figures, the document aimed to describe the German armed forces as apolitical and largely innocent of the crimes committed by the Nazi regime. Hébert shows how that strategy was also adopted by the lead counsel for the defence in the High Command trial, Hans Laternser.[3] Hébert finds that Court's subsequent ruling to be nuanced and measured, taking into account each defendant's individual culpability.[3] Hébert's conclusions Hébert then discusses the failure of the American authorities to publish the trial materials in German, which may have led in part to the Americans' failure to educate and convince the German public. In the conclusion, which reviewers have described as "thoughtful", the author points out the value of the trial in creating a comprehensive record of the Wehrmacht's crimes. On the other hand, Hébert does not see that the American prosecutors have achieved their goals and concludes that the justice was not served in the end.[5][2]
Reviewing Hitler's Generals on Trial in Military Review, Mark Montesclaros of the Army Command and General Staff College describes the book's treatment of the political context of the trial and subsequent developments as one of its "greatest insights".[7] He points out that American authorities in Germany were not only seeking justice but, at the same time, trying to rebuild the German society, conduct a de-Nazification program, and recruit West Germany into a military coalition in the face of the looming Cold war with the Soviet Union. Faced with these conflicting priorities, the Americans opted for the reconciliation with the former enemy, which included clemency programs for those convicted in war crimes trials. Mark Montesclaros "highly recommends" the book to those interested in international military justice and post-war developments in Germany.[7] Reviewing the work, historian Alaric Searle notes the book's "success, with only 208 pages of text, [in] providing a readable, accessible, and tightly structured overview of an extremely complex case".[5] He contrasts it with other literature on war crimes trials which he describes as "longwinded affairs, written by lawyers" and recommends Hitler's Generals on Trial for teaching purposes.[5] American scholar Jonathan Lurie, reviewing the book in H-Net, finds that it "breaks new ground" and is "strongly recommended".[8] Comparing it to the 2008 collection of essays, Atrocities on Trial: Historical Perspectives on the Politics of Prosecuting War Crimes, edited by Patricia Heberer and Jürgen Matthäus, which covered a number of war crimes trials, Lurie notes the strength of Hébert's book in thoroughly analysing a single case and its outcomes and lessons. He goes on to describe the work as an "outstanding contribution" that asks "difficult questions" about justice, retribution, and atonement.[8]
References
|
I've implemented the suggestions and added another review to the article. K.e.coffman (talk) 00:47, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
" Hébert finds the Court's subsequent ruling to be nuanced and measured, taking into account each defendant's individual culpability."1st question asks which court are we referring to, and secondly what is meant by subsequent? Does this mean the earlier court's ruling, or does it mean the secondary (subsequent) court's ruling? Spintendo ᔦᔭ 16:57, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
= Exceeded the requirements | = Met the requirements | = Failed to meet the requirements
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. | There were several areas where issues needed to be addressed. The nominating editor was extremely conscientious in implementing all of the requested changes. | |
1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. | The layout of areas are according to MOS. | |
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. | The reference system that the page used was aligned with Harvard style to include a Notes and References section. | |
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). | All of the article's sources are open access available through EBSCO and other catalogs, from the public library system. This is something the article should be commended for. | |
2c. it contains no original research. | While the book itself is the product of research done by the author, their topic is not an original one, and has been covered by others in the past. Therefore this research would not qualify as original research. | |
2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism. | In covering these reviews, quotations were used to help illustrate the book and its impact. Quotes were kept where the reviewers were providing a value judgement. The nom and myself as reviewer both believe this to be acceptable. | |
3. Broad in its coverage: | ||
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic. | As a research book, guidance suggests that the article contain an analysis of the book by secondary sources, which are included here. All of these sources are academic in nature. | |
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style). | As a research book, guidance suggests that the article contain a summary of the major points covered in the book. To allow for this, the article's covering of the book was split into the three usual sections of beginning/middle/end, in this case it was premise/trial+example/conclusions. There may have been areas of relevance that were missed, but the main basics were covered. The intro to the contents section is excellent, a very nice touch. Areas where confusion arose regarding this trial as opposed to the other, more well-known trial were delineated. The premise of the book, that the trials were to hopefully meet two goals, was listed in the premise section. In covering the conclusion of the book, that same premise was again addressed, showing continuity within the article. | |
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each. | The article stays neutral. | |
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. | The article is fairly new, and though perhaps a controversial topic, there is no evidence of any edit wars. | |
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. | One image, and its documentation is in order. | |
6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. | ||
7. Overall assessment. | Both the nom and myself felt that the article was slightly "barebones", in that larger sections of the book were not discussed in detail. This, along with having the quotes replaced by a more rigorous use of paraphrasing, would have made the article longer, but this length would not have necessarily made it better. The article we now have is a Good Article. |
The article requires a more standard level summary of the book's contents. As it now stands, this is what is described in the 'Contents' section of the article:
"The quest for justice by the American prosecutors"and (b.)
"their attempt to use the proceedings to educate the German public."
"evidence of the specific war crimes and crimes against humanity committed by the accused was damning"
Elements of the summary 'Contents' section, shown above, were largely informed through readings of the sourced review materials. This reliance on those reviews to do the talking, and not the book itself, raises problems. For example, where it's mentioned "Hébert discusses proceedings"
and "the Defense case and the subsequent ruling are also covered."
— these descriptions in and of themsleves do not constitute acceptable levels of summary, according to the precepts of WP:SS Additionally, the passage "The reviewer notes that Hébert's book analysed a single trial, putting it into historical perspective."
(addressed by GAR #19) is troubling for being, first and foremost, insufficiently paraphrased; secondly, that it describes such little information overall.
It is my opinion that these issues ought to be addressed before the article can attain GA status. Spintendo ᔦᔭ
According to WP:PLOT and WP:SS, Wikipedia treats creative works (including research books) in an encyclopedic manner, requiring entries in the article on the development, design, reception, significance, and influence of works in addition to concise summaries of those works. The article does not presently contain a concise summary of what is contained in the book. Spintendo ᔦᔭ
Too many quotes. MOS:QUOTE states while quotations are an indispensable part of Wikipedia, try not to overuse them. Brief quotations of copyrighted text may be used to illustrate a point, establish context, or attribute a point of view or idea. It is generally recommended that content be written in Wikipedia editors' own words. Using too many quotes is incompatible with an encyclopedic writing style. Consider minimizing the use of quotations by paraphrasing, as quotations should not replace the free text written by an editor. Spintendo ᔦᔭ
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.
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Spintendo (talk · contribs) 14:12, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
It will be my pleasure to begin this review. If I may say so, this topic was found to have a dearth of English language sources available (beyond the good ones provided so far), so the fact that this article exists and with the good level of information appended to it, owes a debt of gratitude to the efforts of the nominator and editors at the German Wikipedia who edited the article there. The nominator, who is fluent in German and English, was able to incorporate these important German language sources into English so well, that the article in no way appears as if it has been translated into English from another language, as many articles with poorer translation-related efforts show.
Let's take this section by section, with the end results being tabulated in the table I've placed below. Spintendo 14:12, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
No issues.
No issues.
Since they didnt have ISBN's, I found OCLC's for a few of these items:
PLAYS AND NOVELS
Thank you to the nominator for all their assistance! Spintendo 15:54, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
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. | Prose is well written, due mostly to the excellent translation of the nominating editor with the assistance of local editors. | |
1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. | All WP:MOS guidelines have been followed. | |
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. | The article uses Citation Style 1 in accordance with that style's rules. | |
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). | Proper use of the {{rp}} template where it was necessary. All links in the references found to be in working order. A search of English-based databases (ProQuest, EBSCO, Gale & Weslaw) showed a distinct lack of English language sources available on the subject. Many more sources were available from German language references (and used here) which all appear to meet the requirements for reliable sources both on German Wikipedia () and its English counterpart (WP:RS).
| |
2c. it contains no original research. | The article contains research, but that research has been done by writers and banking industry historians, and thus, does not meet the definition of original research | |
3. Broad in its coverage: | ||
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic. | Main aspects addressed. | |
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style). | The prose stays on topic. | |
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each. | Although the subject would be considered a criminal, the subject matter is approached fairly and with a neutral point of view. | |
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. | Article is stable. | |
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. | All images appear to be in the public domain or have been added through the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International license. | |
6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. | All media used are relevant to the topic and have suitable captions. | |
7. Overall assessment. | For the reasons listed above, it is this reviewer's opinion that the article meets all GA status requirements. |
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Spintendo (talk · contribs) 04:25, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
The article will be reviewed according to the criteria specified below. As the nominating editor at this time is unable to meaningfully participate in this review due to a ban, the issues affecting the article will be mentioned in the GA table below and the review will be concluded. For local editors monitoring, a list of the most pressing items is shown below in the GA Table. Regards, Spintendo 04:25, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
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. |
Because the nominating editor was unavailable for assistance, the needed copyediting and cleanup of the prose could not be carried out. | |
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. | ||
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). |
The article contains numerous dead links. The amount of links which are not working make checking of the references difficult. | |
2c. it contains no original research. | Unable to ascertain due to sources being inaccessible. | |
2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism. |
The article contains a large amount of text which is insufficiently paraphrased from the source material. The problematic text may be viewed here. | |
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. | Because links could not be accessed, the entire breadth of WP:WEIGHT (the potential for WP:NPOV in the sources used) could not be assessed. | |
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. | The article does not meet GA status. Areas for improvement are noted above. |
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.
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Spintendo (talk · contribs) 15:43, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
It looks like this is round 2 for the article, let's hope this one works out well. Let's start with a run-though of the article followed by the usual checks, including any from round 1.
In lieu of adding my signature after each entry below, I'm just going to place a date stamp. That way, when a response is given from the nominator, the date stamp (along with threading the responses) will act as natural barriers between what I say and the nom's reply. (My sig contains a red circle, which very quickly becomes distracting after dozens of them start to appear on a page.) Spintendo 15:48, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
The screenplay was also based on the books Inside Hitler's Bunker by historian Joachim Fest and Until the Final Hour by Hitler's former private secretary Traudl Junge, among other accounts of the period."The screenplay was also" implies that something about the screenplay was mentioned just before — yet this is the first time the screenplay is being mentioned. Suggest removing also. 15:43, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
It was, in part, controversial with audiences for showing the human side of Hitler and its portrayal of members of the Third Reich."In part" implies that the other "parts" are also to be mentioned at that point in the text. The only reason to mention something as being a "part" is when either mentioning many parts or contrasting the part with the whole. But no contrasting is taking place here in the text. Suggest omitting "in part". 15:48, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
No issues.
Development
Producer-screenwriter Bernd Eichinger wanted to make a film about Adolf Hitler and the Nazi Party for 20 years but was, at first, discouraged after its enormity prevented him from doing so.This is not referenced. 15:48, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
After reading a publication about the book by historian Joachim Fest called Inside Hitler's Bunker: The Last Days of the Third Reich (2002), he became inspired by Fest's work for inclusion in the film.This should read as "Eichinger was inspired to begin after reading Inside Hitlers Bunker by Joachim Fest." 15:48, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
After completing the script for the film, Eichinger presented it to director Oliver Hirschbiegel who hesitated at first because he "reacted to the idea of Nazism as a taboo", as he was German. He eventually agreed to helm the project.This sentence is too choppy. It's not clear who did the hesitation, what happened after the hesitation (because it says "at first", which implies that whatever his reaction was second, should be listed), and isn't clear why being German makes the subject taboo (was this something Hirschbiegel mentioned as being part of the reason for it being taboo, "being German", or was that added on?) Please clarify. 15:48, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
Though he was interested in exploring how the people of Germany "could have plumbed such depths", as a German, Hirschbiegel hesitated to take it as he "reacted to the idea of Nazism as a taboo".Please tell me if this fits or is still unclear. I fear I might be misunderstanding you haha. -NowIsntItTime(chats)(doings) 16:43, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
Casting
I had some doubts when I was first offered the part of Hitler in Downfall. I asked myself whether I really wanted to get involved in this ugly, terrible stuff. But it was also a temptation—the subject has a fascinating side—so I agreed.The style of quote used here is distracting from the other text. Since it's only two sentences, it doesnt really need to be offset like this. 16:08, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
In order to prepare for the role, Ganz conducted four months of research and studied a recording of Hitler in private conversation with Finnish Field Marshal Carl Gustaf Emil Mannerheim in order to properly mimic Hitler's conversational voice and Austrian dialect.The first part is redundant. It can simply be worded as "Ganz conducted four months of research studying the Hitler-Mannerheim recording in order to closely mimic Hitler's conversational voice and Austrian dialect." 16:08, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
Ganz also became convinced that Hitler had Parkinson's disease after seeing him in the newsreel Die Deutsche Wochenschau presenting medals to Hitler Youth, and had visited a hospital to observe patients with the disorder.This is almost a word for word copy of the text from the Guardian interview with Ganz. It should be paraphrased or placed in quotes. 16:08, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
Numerous actors were cast in the roles for members of the Nazi Party and the other people in the bunker; Juliane Köhler, Ulrich Noethen, Ulrich Matthes, Corinna Harfouch, Heino Ferch, and Michael Mendl were cast as Eva Braun, Heinrich Himmler, Joseph Goebbels, Magda Goebbels, Albert Speer, and Helmuth Weidling respectively.This passage is unnecessary, as there is a cast list already in the article. 16:08, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
Filming and design
Principal photography lasted 12 weeks, in the period from September to November 2003, under the working title Sunset.Extra comma; keep just the one between 2003 and under and delete the one between weeks and in. 16:13, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
16:23, 19 October 2019 (UTC)Since theThe film is set mostly in and around the Führerbunker; Hirschbiegelsaid hemade an effort to accurately reconstruct the look and atmosphere....
...of World War II through eyewitness accounts, survivors' memoirs, and other historical sources→.←(period)
16:23, 19 October 2019 (UTC)by filmingHirschbiegel filmed in the cities of Berlin, Munich, and Saint Petersburg, Russia,wherewith an industrial district slum along the Obvodny Canalwas alsoused to portray the historical setting in Berlin.
suggest: "To lighten the mood, Lara's colleagues engaged in other non-production related activities such as football." 20:21, 23 October 2019 (UTC)HerLara's other colleagues briefly stopped during production to do other activities
Ganz kept a happy mood in between takes for his scenes.This is not clear how and in what way Ganz kept that happy mood, nor has any particular way in which he kept it been mentioned. 20:21, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
HirschbiegelSince there is much use of the term also in a lot of these passages, I'm assuming that these were written by a native German speaker, as that language often uses the word. In English however, the word is omitted or placed elsewhere depending on the context of how its being used - which is almost always when mentioned along with something else which is similar or relevant. In this passage, the also is meant to indicate that the director also used coping techniques during production to lighten the director's own moods. But since this paragraph is mentioning multiple incidents of coping mechanisms, the use of also is not needed, as they can be described individually with a prepatory statement that mentions no one in particular. Example: "Several members of the cast and crew indicated that due to the tone of the film and its subject, other activities were needed to encourage levity. Hirshbeigel found relief through the music of Bach, while Ganz used ____ (needs to be specified for Ganz, as mentioned earlier), while other members of the production team played football" -- or something to that effect. Describing it that way enable the word also to be omitted. 20:21, 23 October 2019 (UTC)alsonoted the shoot to be deeply depressing and said he had to find relief at home after filming by listening to Johann Sebastian Bach's music.
There was also tremendous interest for the film during filming which lead the Russian press to visit the set, making the producers uneasy and occasionally defensive. Yana Bezhanskay, director of Globus Film, Constantin's Russian partner, raised her voice to Russian journalists and said: "This is an antifascist film and nowhere in it do you see Hitler praised."I understand that this comment was made during filming, but I think that it would be best placed in the section describing the reaction to Hitler's portrayal. 20:21, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
The film explores Hitler's decisions and motives during his final days through the perspective of the people in the Führerbunker. The overlying idea, according to Eichinger, was to make a film about Hitler and war-time Germany that was very close to historical truth, as part of a theme that would allow the German nation to save their own history and "experience their own trauma".This reads better having the two parts flipped, so it says "According to Eichinger, the overall idea was to make a film about Hitler and war-time Germany that was very close to historical truth, as part of a theme that would allow the German nation to save their own history and "experience their own trauma". In service of that idea, the film explores Hitler's decisions and motives during his final days through the perspective of those individuals who occupied the Führerbunker at those times." 20:21, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
Hitler and the Nazi party
During production, Hirschbiegel came to the conclusion that Hitler often charmed people with his personality, saying that he was "like a shell", attracting people with his self-pity, but inside the shell was only "an enormous will for destruction". Many of the people in the film, including Traudl Junge, are shown to be enthusiastic in interacting with Hitler instead of feeling threatened or anxious by his presence and authority. Hirschbiegel said that the production team sought to give Hitler a three-dimensional personality, telling NBC: "We know from all accounts that he was a very charming man – a man who managed to seduce a whole people into barbarism.This needs to better explain which theme is being discussed here, which I beleive is that of trauma (also mentioned in the opening paragraph of this section) which in a sense, also means betrayal (a more standardized theme) - in that Hitler's charm was a betrayal of those individuals whom were charmed. All that would be needed is a revised sentence at the begining of this passage which mentions betrayal. (I'm open to other suggestions on what themes are being explored by showing Hitler's effect on people who worked with him. Those themes should ideally be taken from the standard ones described under Theme (narrative) or some other equivalent Wikipedia article discussing themes specific to film - I haven't searched for any of these, but finding them and Wikilinking them would be helpful.) "Hitler and the Nazi party" used as the subheading now is actually the subject and not really the theme. 20:21, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
The film, at first, failed to find a distributor, but was released by Constantin Film in Germany on September 16"After first failing to find a distributor, the film was eventually released in Germany by Constantin Film." 18:12, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
Controversy
Box office and awards
Suggestion for awards table
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Spintendo 21:09, 29 October 2019 (UTC)
Critical response
Reviews for the film were often very positive, despite debate surrounding the film from critics and audiences upon its release.I think a
{{See below|#Controversy}}
would work here right after the end of this passage. 21:09, 29 October 2019 (UTC)Controversy
No issues.
Spintendo 18:12, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
The following scholarly work is already used in the article. The |DOI=
parameter can be added to its citation template in addition to the |JSTOR=
parameter already used, since DOIs are theoretically more stable:
Spintendo 18:12, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
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. | There are slight grammar issues, predominantly innocent ones — such as those particular to German/English transliteration — but these would have been easily corrected had the review continued. | |
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. | ||
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. | ||
2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism. | ||
3. Broad in its coverage: | ||
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic. | There are scholarly aspects of the film and its reception and impact on wider culture that could not be covered due to access issues with the source documents. The nominator is urged to consider submitting an application to WP:LIB in order to obtain free access to materials. | |
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. | The nominator has clearly worked very hard on improving this article and that is to be commended. I see only two hurdles in passing GA review: the completion of the grammar check and the incorporation of the suggested scholarly works, which would give readers a better appreciation of the film through the analysis offered by those sources. |
Spintendo 00:22, 7 November 2019 (UTC)
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.
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Spintendo (talk · contribs) 23:20, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
Hello! I hope you're doing well. I'm Spintendo, and I'll be conducting this review. The Discussion section below is where we'll have most of our interactions. I've divided that section into subsections based on the headers from the article. Please feel free to place "done"-type comments, objections, or counter-proposals in each section for the issues I'll be bringing up there. I see that there's a co-nominator for this GA, so let me take a moment to welcome them as well to this review—please feel free to jump in anywhere you like, it's much appreciated. Without further ado, let's begin! Spintendo 23:20, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
is a song recorded by Cuban singer-songwriter Jon Secada for his eponymous debut studio album Jon Secada (1992). Written by Secada and Miguel Morejon, SBK Records released it as the album's lead single in March 1992.I think the information on who wrote the song should be placed in its own sentence. Combining it with the information re: SBK Records does not read well.
Critics gave a mixed response to "Just Another Day",this should end with a period.
while some critics lauded the song for being catchy and praised Secada's vocal delivery, others compared Secada to other artists and found the singer's vocal performances too dramatic.It's not clear how comparing Secada to other artists would be a negative.
The song's impact on radio, its emotional intensity, and its success in reaching diverse markets was acknowledged and celebrated by various critics.This appears to be a lot of information being ascribed to these critics. It's not clear which critics are to be pegged for these assertions. It would be helpful to see who these critics are, if possible (not to include their names--which can be left out of the lede--but simply to verify that's what they said).
Kevin Layne directed the accompanying music video, which shows Secada utilizing triumphant gestures and containing visual elements that mirror the musical progressions of music videos at that time.I think this information in the lede is too early; it should be just in the body of the article (the part about Secada utilizing triumphant gestures). For now, I think that it should just state that the music video was directed by so and so.
Layne won Best Director at the 1993 Billboard Music Awards.This is ostensibly for Just another day, but it reads a bit obscure. Is this best director of the video? also, I dont see that the Billboard awards has/had a best video director award.
It became the first song to simultaneously reach the top five of the Hot 100 and Adult Contemporary charts and the Hot Latin Songs chart, under the title "Otro Dia Mas Sin Verte", since Gloria Estefan's "Don't Wanna Lose You" in 1989.If Gloria's song was the first in 1989, then the claim should be that "It became the second song to simultaneously...."
"Otro Dia Mas Sin Verte" propelled Secada to become an acclaimed singer-songwriter in the 1990s, gaining recognition in Latin America, Europe, and Mexico. It helped opened the doors for him, granting the singer international success, including extensive radio exposure in Mexico."propelled" should be changed to "marked", i.e., "Otro Dia Mas Sin Verte marked the beginning of Secada's acclaim as a singer/songwriter...." The claim about the song opening doors should be deleted. Spintendo 23:45, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
Jon Secada auditioned for his school's musical adaption of Charles Dickens' A Christmas Carol, discovering his passion for music. He enjoyed the status it brought him, as it began attracting friends, which was what he desired. Secada went on to attend the University of Miami, where he earned a master's degree in Jazz Vocal Performance. While providing backing vocals for various artists, he composed songs for Japanese instrumentalists, Takanaka and Seiko, Venezuelan singer Jose Luis "El Puma" Rodriguez, Mexican vocalist Luis Miguel, and Spanish singer Julio Iglesias.It's not clear how this information relates to the song. This might work in the article on Secada himself, but the song article should focus on the genesis of the song.
In 1987, music producer Emilio Estefan, was given a demo tape of Secada, by Jorge Casas and Ray Ostwald, former classmates of Secada.The paragraph should begin with this statement.
The tape evoked a range of emotions in Emilio, as he believed that Secada has a chance at success.This is not grammatical. What Emilio believed, whether that belief came immediately from hearing the tape, and what the tape had in relation to the song Just Another Day is not known.
In 1988, Secada released a Spanish-language album, while it highlighted his baritone and emotive delivery, it was overlookedThe Wikilink for Secada's 1988 Spanish language album would work, if there is one available. Also, overlooked by whom?
Two of the singles Secada wrote, "Coming Out of the Dark" (1991) and "Can't Forget You" (1991), peaked at number one on the US Billboard Hot 100 chart. Secada provided backing vocals for Gloria during her world tour for the album. Secada aspired to become a soloist, despite Emilio cautioning him that it would require time. Emilio guided Secada in developing his songwriting trajectory,[2] and advised him on refining his abilities. Emilio encouraged him to compose his own music and cultivate a unique sound. He emphasized the importance of working on his appearance and striving to enhance it to the best of his abilitiesI'm not sure what this has to do with the song. Again, this seems like it might be best placed in the article on Secada himself.
Emilio provided a demo tape of Secada to SBK Records vice president of A&R Nancy Brennan and EMI Records chairman Charles Koppelman, who both enjoyed itThis is referenced to Secada (likely "New Day" publication) but there are no page numbers for that source.
Brennan and Koppelman flew from New York City to London to see Secada perform at Wembley Stadium where Gloria introduced himIntroduced him to who?
Koppelman expressed an interest in Secada flourishing as a singer capable of being a non-format artist.This is not grammatical.
Emilio found Secada's timing as a soloist auspicious, finding limited musical alternatives to rap and metal at the timeDoes timing in this instance refer to Secada's musical timing or his timing with regards to signing his contract?
He described Secada as a pop and R&B artist and believed that Secada represented a unique genre that people were yearning forThis is worded strangely, as pop and R&B is a type of music and not inherently unique (that would make all categories of music unique, which is not the best way to describe their variety.)
Faced with concerns about a scarcity of original material, Secada sensed the urgency to swiftly demonstrate to record executives his artistic essence. He then contacted Miguel Morejon and the two of them secluded themselves in a period of intense emotional exhilaration and penned several songsPer: MOS:PEACOCK this should be re-written or deleted. The information about Morejon and Secada collaborating to write the song is very important, it just needs to be stripped of puffery (e.g., Secada sensed the urgency to swiftly demonstrate to record executives his artistic essence.)
There was one in particular that ignited the greatest excitement within them, "Just Another Day", which was completed in 30 minutes and was envisioned by both of them as being the album's titular trackI would keep everything except "ignited the greatest excitement within them", which is puffery.
Secada felt that Morejon played a pivotal role in his artistic growth and development as a musician.It's not clear how, at this point, Secada reaches this conclusion.
Phil Ramone produce "Just Another Day" and "Angel", and Secada expressed his gratitude for having him produce both tracksThis is not grammatical. Ideally, it should just state that Ramone produced these tracks, and leave "gratitude" out of it.
Secada believed that "Just Another Day" serves as a testament to the emotional state he was in during that period of his life, representing a vibrant mixture of various heartfelt sentiments.This needs a page number. I'm not entirely sure this is what he actually said, it seems very vague. Creative outputs are always influenced by emotional states (I don't see how they could not be) So Secada saying this seems like either filler or a poor paraphrase of what was actually said.
The song was recorded at Crescent MoonIs this a recording studio? Where is it located? Is there a Wikilink for it?
Gloria provided backing vocals on "Just Another Day", her first recording of providing backing harmonies for another artist, as well as co-writing the Spanish version of the track, "Otro Día Más Sin Verte".This could be re-worded better ("provided backing vocals on "Just Another Day" ... her first recording of providing backing harmonies") So did she provide vocals or harmonies (is there a difference?) Spintendo 00:39, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
Secada felt that Gloria was instrumental for translating the track.Is that because there was no paid translator on staff? In any event, anyone who translates text is, pro rata, "instrumental" in its translation. Saying she was instrumental as translator when she was the translator is just redundant.
the track is laced with a seductive Soul II Soul rhythmic cadenceI don't dispute the fact that the song does have a rhythmic cadence, but I'm not sure the credit for it (a song written, produced and sung by Latin talent) should go to Soul II Soul (a British musical collective). W/o access to the source used here (listed as Morse 1992, but which is actually a Boston Globe article), its difficult to see what the author's intent was. Update: Listening to the first 5 seconds of the Secada song, I can hear a sample of the beat used by Soul II Soul in their release Keep On Movin. Spintendo 09:44, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
The Palm Beach Post called the track, along with "If You Go" and "Angel", as an integration of Secada's Latin rhythms with American pop and R&B tones. This is echoed by Deborah Davis of El Norte, who found the track to be a mixture of R&B with the sound and passion of Latin music. While Raquel Riaño of El Confidencial, called the track a catchy and romantic pop song, María Ivette Vega Calles of El Nuevo Dia called it an "alternative ballad". Stephen Holden of The New York Times lauded Secada's ability to transform a "lovelorn ballad" into an impactful song by infusing it with a driving beat, while his intense vocal performance lent it authenticity and credibility. While Ricard Riccio of St. Petersburg Times lauded the track as an exceptional rejuvenating pop song and commended Emilio's sound production, he criticized Gloria's backing vocals for failing to prevent the overall blandness of the songs on the album. Waterloo Region Record deemed the Spanish version to be an improvement over the English version, applauding Secada's emotive vocals set against an assortment of minor keys and unpredictable melodies. This combination, according to the review, resulted in an almost anthemic [sic] expression of poignant longing. Billboard's Larry Flick praised Gloria's harmonies on "Just Another Day", while finding Secada demonstrating a charismatic presence as a contender for both top 40 and AC radio on the song. Flick called lauded the production as being well-executed that blends a rhythmic slow groove, containing captivating piano melodies, and suitably dramatic vocal performance. Flick finds "Just Another Day" as a great introduction to Secada, noticing his potential for a successful career. Charlie Martin of The Messenger, finds the song's message lacking as it depicts a person who is constantly depressed due to the unpredictable presence of their love interest. Joseph Atilano of Inquirer.net, found the song to boast a lively beat that resembles a dance floor anthem. He found the lyrics to have delivered a poignant impact, particularly resonating with the broken-hearted and lonely. Atilano finds Secada pouring his heart out, expressing his deep emotions for the woman he loves, despite the woman's unrestraint [sic] indifference, leaving him feeling lost and adrift without her love.These reviews, 12 of them by my count, all appear in the Music and lyrics section when they ought to be in the Critical reception section. Spintendo 01:24, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
The Spokesman-Review called it "easy yet catchy".[26] Jim Abbott of Orlando Sentinel found it to feature "lilting Latin-flavored flareI think the reception section should begin with its strongest, most well known positive reviews first, followed by lesser known. Negative reception would then follow, in proportion to how thge song is generall viewed today. For example, if there is a 70% favorable view of the song, then 70% of the reviews should be positive while 30% are negative. Please advise on your thoughts about this.
Chuck Campbell of The Knoxville News-Sentinel lauded Secada's vocal delivery on the track as being powerful and restrained, suggesting that Michael Bolton should take note, while also noting that the song's structure is relatively simple.This review appears to fall under the category of a mixed review, in that it has something positive to say but yet ends in a strange negative assertion "the song's structure was relatively simple". I believe that mixed reviews generally have no place in the article, unless something extraordinary was said which can be quoted (as long as its not a mixed message).
While praising "Just Another Day" as a "dynamic radio hit", Ernie Long of The Morning Call urged Secada to reduce the dramatic intensity of his vocal delivery on the tracks. Long expressed concern that the singer's tendency to "belt out every song like it's his last" could be detrimental to him, a tactic that has plagued Rick Astley and Bolton.Again, these are mixed reviews which, because they are "mixed", end up saying and adding nothing to the article. If a person says that they like something but that they would not want to try it ever again, then what is the reader of such a review to surmise from that conclusion? That the item is good, or bad? Because the reviewer who publishes a mixed review has essentially taken a place on the fence, the reader is left there as well, with no better understanding of what the review was meant to accomplish. These types of mixed reviews should be steered away from at the beginning of the critical reception section, and should only be placed towards the end of that section along with other mixed and/or negative reviews.
given its (Baywatch) combination of action and drama in a cohesive and compact format.it's not known what is meant by compact and cohesive format.
In 2014, Secada appeared in a bilingual promotional advertisement for Wendy's that parodied "Otro Dia Mas Sin Verte", which People en Espanol humorously dubbed.Humorously dubbed what? There seems to be a word or a couple of words missing here.
Secada performed "Otro Dia Mas Sin Verte" at the 1992 Acapulco Festival in Mexico. The audience enthusiastically encouraged him to return for an encore, during which Secada performed "Just Another Day". The performance garnered positive acclaim as it inspired the audience to stand up and dance.I think it would be best to just mention the performance. Everything else about the "performance garnering positive acclaim as it inspired the audience to stand and dance" is poorly worded. Spintendo 11:54, 29 July 2023 (UTC)
with Holden noting the singer's falsetto range displaying an "unusual strength and staying power".Holden who? I think this is referring to Stephen Holden but I'm not sure, It just has the last name. Also, and it may be a rhetorical question for Holden, but why is Secada's strength "unusual"? Spintendo 01:29, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
Latin music chart analysis, John Lannert, called it an "ultrarare chart triple"This should read "Latin music chart analyst John Lannert"
visited Latin radio stations as well as contemporary hit radios and adult contemporary stationsThis should read "visited Spanish and English language contemporary radio stations"
"Angel" gained Secada recognition as a smooth and versatile pop singer who delivers songs in both English and Spanish.Recognition from whom?
"Just Another Day" ranked at number 15 on Billboard's top Latin and Brazilian songs to have appeared on the Hot 100 in its first 50 years.Not grammatical.
expressing his delight over the positive reception it has receivedThis should be changed to "expressing his delight over the positive reception it received".
He expressed how he wasn't prepared for the song's popularity, saying that he never thought he would reach such heights.This should be changed to "Secada expressed how unprepared he was for the songs popularity, saying he never thought it would reach such heights."
The label aimed to replicate Secada's chart success across different markets by capitalizing on the rising popularity of the Barrio Boyzz.This claim comes out of nowhere. It should be explained with better context or deleted.
Influence by Secada's achievementsThe word should be influenced, not influence.
Having caught a glimpse of success, he became driven and ambitious, no longer willing to settle for anything less than striving for further achievements.This should be deleted.
Secada expressed his aspiration for every song he writes to transcend into the realm of being a definitive and universally well-received song. He yearns for his compositions to retain a timeless allure, resonating with audiences for decades beyond their initial release.This text should also be deleted in its entirety. Spintendo 15:55, 29 July 2023 (UTC)
Gloria Estefan makes a cameo appearance in the music video. While a music video for "Just Another Day" was produced, a European tour began. In the video, critic Carol Vernallis, describes Secada's arms rising overhead in a triumphant gesture, with the camera tilts upward, synchronizing with a modulation up a whole step, mirrors the musical progression found in "Just Another Day".This entire paragraph has areas where it's not grammatical, where quotation marks are used instead of italics, where strange asides are made in the middle of the paragraph where it's trying to make one point (i.e., describing who's in the video, then stating that a European tour began, then going back to talking about the video) then moving to another point. This section needs a lot of work. Spintendo 15:55, 29 July 2023 (UTC)
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. | Numerous areas of the text are not grammatical, and several spelling errors exist | |
1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. | The article contains several instances of MOS:AWW | |
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. | The article uses Notes and Bibliography (or Works cited)-style references. In that system, all references are included in the notes section. Sources that have page numbers are shown in the notes section as author-name links to another separate entry in the Works cited section. In this article, all the sources are located in the work cited section, with every referenced source being given an author-name link to an entry in the Works cited section, instead of only being shown in the Notes section, which creates unnecessary redundancy for the reader | |
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). | Secada's own publication (which is used as a reference many times within the article) has no page numbers listed with any of the ref tags. That makes the information sourced from it unverifiable. | |
2c. it contains no original research. | — | |
2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism. | Sections of close paraphrasing identified from the Sun-Sentinel source | |
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). | Certain sections questionably delve into off-topic areas, such as Secada's audition for his school's musical production of A Christmas Carol | |
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. | The article is uniquely stable, having had only 183 edits over a 15 year time period. | |
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. | The article has failed GA review. |
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.
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Spintendo (talk · contribs) 23:47, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
Hello! I hope you're doing well. I'm Spintendo, and I'll be conducting this review. The Discussion section below is where we'll have most of our interactions. (I'm using the {{Fake heading}}
template to preserve the integrity of the review and to minimize disruption to the transcluded table of contents which appears on the article's talk page.) I've divided the discussion section into subsections based on the headers from the article. Please feel free to place "done" or "fixed" -type comments, objections, or counter-proposals in each section for the issues I'll be bringing up there. Without further ado, let's begin! Spintendo 23:47, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
His collective of creatorsThis should be described as "his business partners" because (a) it is a collective that he is a part of, and not his own collective (i.e., describing it as "his collective") and (b) the term "collective of creators" does not specify that these were content creators (i.e., what did he create?) and (c) the phrase sounds promotional by using industry jargon rather than long established phrases (e.g., just calling them "business partners"). Spintendo 23:47, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
{{Hatnote}}
to both Kai Cenat and Union Square.Done Davest3r08 >:) (talk) 17:42, 21 December 2023 (UTC)
When Cenat, who was born in December 2001, became a teenager, the social internet was dominated by fleeting video clips on the platform Vine, which sprouted a generation of mini-celebrities who could express themselves in the six seconds available. When Cenat was attending high school at Frederick Douglass Academy in Harlem, a YouTuber named Jake Paul began to attract attention, staging media-baiting pranks that made him the bane of his West Hollywood neighborhood. And by the time Cenat was in college at the State University of New York at Morrisville, a charismatic gamer who went by the name Ninja had become a superstar on Twitch, with tens of thousands tuning in to watch him play the video game Fortnite. By then, Cenat had begun to travel to Atlanta to work with a collective of fellow entertainers that called itself A.M.P., for Any Means Possible.[1]
— Davest3r08 >:) (talk) 02:10, 11 December 2023 (UTC)Union Square, the location of the riot, was named after the intersection of Broadway and the city's 19th-century street grid. It is located at the intersections of the 4, 5, 6, L, N, Q, R, and W subway lines, which provided the ease of the transportion of large amounts of people to the square. Cenat attended Frederick Douglass Academy and the State University of New York at Morrisville. Around the time of him attending university, he traveled to Atlanta, Georgia to work with a group of Internet personalities called Any Means Possible (AMP). This is not Cenat's first giveaway, as he surprised a Massachusetts woman he used to visit with $20,000, saying she was a second mother to him, and that she deserved it. The woman, Cathy Parker, was unwilling to accept the money.
In a live stream on August 2, he claimed that he would give away gift cards, headphones, gaming chairs, computers, webcams, keyboards, and microphones to attendees who could correctly answer questions about YouTube and live streaming.
"Mr. Cenat, who is from the Bronx, told his Twitch followers on Wednesday that he would be in Union Square on Friday. He asked how many fans would show up. A flurry of answers came in: 1,000, 5,000, 10,000. A friend sitting next to him said so many would come that Mr. Cenat would need security and barricades. “All trains go here so there’s no excuse,” Mr. Cenat told those watching."[3] Spintendo 20:47, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
The following year, he gained popularity after a series of livestreams featuring artists such as Drake, 21 Savage, Toosii and Lil Baby.This should be reworded to "The following year he gained popularity after producing a series of livestreams with Drake, 21 Savage, Toosii and Lil Baby".
In February 2023, during a subathon—an event in which a livestreamer continuously streams in an attempt to gain paid subscribers, Cenat joined United Talent Agency.It's unclear, did Cenat join the talent agency during the livestream? if so, it should be reworded to state that clearly, such as "in February 2023, Cenat filmed his joining of the United Talent Agency during a livestreamed subathon." We can also delete the definition of subathon, since we'll have the Wiktionary page Wikilinked as shown in my example.
In the days preceding the gathering, Cenat announced that he would give away PlayStation 5 consoles at 4 p.m. in Union Square along 14th Street,[4] joined by Fanum, Duke Dennis and Agent00, three Twitch streamers.should be "In the days preceding the gathering, Cenat announced that he would give away PlayStation 5 consoles at 4 p.m. in Union Square along 14th Street, where he would be joined by Fanum, Duke Dennis and Agent00, three Twitch streamers.
In a live stream on August 2, he claimed that he would give away gift cards...This should state "In a livestream on August 2, Cenat claimed...."
Cenat did not have a permit for the gathering. On the day of the giveaway, he posted on Twitter that he would be live streaming the event at 3:30 p.m.should be "Despite not having secured a permit for a gathering at Union Square, Cenat posted on Twitter that he would be live streaming the event at 3:30 p.m."
By 1:30 p.m. the area was filled with fans. The New York City Police Department (NYPD) became aware of the gathering at the same time, as dozens of people began converging. By 3 p.m., a large crowd had gathered in Union SquareThe timeline is unclear here. It says that the area was filled with fans at 1:30, but then again at 3pm it states a large croud had gathered. But didn't the crowd get there at 1:30, when it was "filled with fans?" I would think an area "filled with fans" could be considered "a crowd", although I understand that at 1:30 it was only fans while by 3:30 it was more of a mixture of fans and not fans (see next entry)
partially drawn to the event by further word of the giveaway outside Cenat's fans."many of whom were drawn to the event by word of mouth from sources outside of Cenat's fans" or something to that effect.
By 3:30 p.m., the NYPD had mobilized dozens of officers to the area and established a perimeter; the group took down barriers and conflict broke out between police and members of the crowd.which group took down barriers?
Members of the crowd climbed up a gazebo, street signs, vehicles including a bus, and a George Washington statueI don't think it's possible to "climb up" a bus or vehicle. Street signs and statues you can climb up, but vehicles including buses are climbed upon.
Social media posts of the riot surfaced around the same time.what time would that be?
According to the NYPD, individuals walked around with shovels and axes from a nearby construction site and lit off fireworks" According to the NYPD, individuals walked around with shovels and axes taken from a nearby construction site, while others lit fireworks."
The NYPD called on an estimated one thousand officers to respond as part of a level four mobilizationat what time did this occur?
At least two thousand people came to the event, though police estimate that three to five thousand people were present.who's estimate is the two thousand number?
The NYPD does not use tear gas.But the source given for this claim confirms that they do use pepper spray. It's unlikely that Cenat, if he made this claim, really knows what the difference between tear gas and pepper spray is. He may have seen one used while assuming it was the other. In any event, the claim that NYPD does not use tear gas should be accompanied with the statement that they do use pepper spray. Spintendo 20:53, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
Cenat was either taken into police custody or let go on his accord and charged with inciting a riot and unlawful assembly.I'm not sure this timeline works, but if it's what media has reported, then were stuck with it. It should at least state he was released "on his own accord after being charged with..." if the charges came that day, if they were the next day it should say"Cenat was initially allowed to leave the area on his own accord but was charged ____" with it stating whenever the time and day he was charged. Spintendo 06:39, 17 December 2023 (UTC)
At approximately 5:00 p.m., Cenat was taken into police custody and charged with inciting a riot and unlawful assemblyThis contradicts NYTimes reporting, which stated Kai left the scene of his own volition (or was at least given a friendly escort):
"Rather than arrest Mr. Cenat immediately, for example, the police could have used him to address the crowd, he said. “The minute that the N.Y.P.D. moved Kai Cenat from the scene, they lost their chance to leverage him,” Mr. Raymond said."Spintendo 04:43, 13 December 2023 (UTC)
- Wednesday, August 2nd, Kai Cenat's Instagram story announces a giveaway to start at Union Square Park on Friday, August 4 at 4 p.m.
- Friday, August 4th 12:00 p.m. Cenat repeats messages on instagram and twitch.
- 1:30 p.m., NYPD starts to became aware of a large crowd (around 300 or so) of teens assembling in Union Square
- By 3 p.m., that number has grown exponentially, as the giveaway goes viral and thousands began arriving in Union Square. The park was soon filled with people obstructing traffic
- Around 3:30, the crowd begins taking down barriers and throwing objects at police. People also jumped on cars as unrest grew.
- At 3:48 p.m. the New York Police Department says on X,"Due to police activity, avoid the area surrounding Union Square Park & use alternate routes. Expect a police presence in the area and residual traffic delays."
- 3:50 p.m., a large police bus moves into position at the square, which will later begin filling up with arrests.
- 4:00 p.m., Cenat arrives. During a short stream inside his vehicle, Cenat flashes a fistful of what he says are $100 gift cards stored in a brown CVS paper bag to give away. When he notices the chaos, his descriptions immediately take an ominous tone: "They're throwing tear gas out there, we're not going to do nothing until it's safe . . . everybody for themselves, because it's a war out there man."
- Seconds later, Cenat's vehicle comes to a stop and he exits, but is immediately swarmed by fans. The stream cuts out shortly after Cenat's bodyguards begin pushing people away from him. Law enforcement eventually remove Cenat from the park for safety reasons. He is not officially placed "in custody" at that time, and is free to leave.
- With Cenat now gone (along with, presumably, all the gift cards as well as any hoped for PS5's) the crowd's frustration peaks from roughly 4:15 - 4:55 p.m., and the riot is in full swing, encompassing food vendor carts being upset and bottles thrown. The misuse of the aforementioned construction equipment occurs during the next 40 minutes. Arrested individuals are placed on the bus while the bus itself becomes the target of projectiles.
- By 5 p.m., police, some on horseback, have finally organized enough that they begin making coordinated inroads into segregating and dispersing the crowd. This largely takes place over the course of the next hour.
- As it grows closer to 6 p.m., police have pushed much of the crowd well out of the park.[4][5][6]
At a press conference, Maddrey stated, "When I go back later on this evening, I will have an after-action determine [sic] exactly what our steps were. We can't allow this to happen again in the future".If these are the mayor's actual words, then we need a
{{sic}}
template.Cenat said, "I don't condone any of the things that went on that day. None of that is cool." He reiterated that he is "beyond disappointed in anybody who became destructive that day. Anything we do like this has to be safe and fun. We can't just be running around and destroying this and destroying that. I want y'all to know that none of that is how I wanted any of this to go. I'm trying to get through this and stuff like that (the charges) and handle it the correct way. If I ever wanna do something like this in the future, I gotta make the right calls, do the right things. I can't stress enough it was not my intention, bro, I don't condone any of the things that went on Friday." Cenat told his followers on Twitch that for the time being, he is going to take a break from streaming to handle the upcoming court dates, adding his first one is August 16. He also urged the media to leave his family alone.[5]
References
In February 2023, the United Talent Agency announced that they would represent Cenat during a subathon. At the end of the livestream, he had amassed 300,000 Twitch subscribers, a record for the platform.It's not clear whose subathon this was, since it merely mentions UTA announcing they would represent Cenat during "a subathon". This was his subathon correct? I it was his, how did they come to make the mention? Spintendo 17:30, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
Kai Cenat is an American livestreamer and YouTuber. He attended Frederick Douglass Academy and the State University of New York at Morrisville. Around the time of him attending university,If the university is already mentioned, it doesnt need to be mentioned a second time. And while it says "at this time", the time period for when he went to this university is not stated. Spintendo 17:30, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
right? — Davest3r08 >:) (talk) 21:14, 22 December 2023 (UTC)At this time, Cenat traveled to Atlanta, Georgia to work with a group of Internet personalities called Any Means Possible (AMP), which he joined in 2020.
In the days preceding the gathering, Cenat announced that he would give away PlayStation 5 consoles at 4 p.m. in Union Square along 14th Street, where he would be joined by Fanum, Duke Dennis and Agent00We need Wikilinks for these three individuals, if they exist as articles. Spintendo 17:38, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
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. | ||
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. | ||
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. | ||
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. |