Talk:Malin massacre

Malin massacre is currently a world history good article nominee. Nominated by Birczenin (talk) at 12:36, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

An editor has indicated a willingness to review the article in accordance with the good article criteria. Further reviews are welcome from any editor who has not contributed significantly to this article (or nominated it), and can be added to the review page, but the decision whether or not to list the article as a good article should be left to the first reviewer.

Short description: 1943 event during World War 2

Military history: European / German / Polish / World War II

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	European military history task force
	German military history task force
	Polish military history task force
	World War II task force

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Malin massacre/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Birczenin (talk · contribs) 12:36, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: Czarking0 (talk · contribs) 23:20, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

For me this article does not deserve to be singled out because it is somewhere between a B and a good article, you have to correct the mistakes in it and remove the pictures which perhaps infringe copyright, and with these mistakes I do not mean encyclopaedic because it is written excellently, but look for better sources, and if there are none then we can just acknowledge it, but in my opinion something else has to be done. so @Birczenin you need to work on it some more. AleszJaTuTylkoSprzątam (talk) 11:47, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'll take this one. More to follow.

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 prose relies heavily on names of people (some of which are historians) which I presume the reader would not find notable outside of this account. I recommend going through the article and deciding which names are really notable. "According to McBride both Polish and Ukrainian police[22] officers were most likely involved in the crime, and the collaborationist police unit operating in Malina may even have had a multinational composition.[23] The contradiction between the 'Polish version' and the 'Ukrainian version' of the tragedy is explained by Malina's tendency to suppress from memory the facts of crimes committed by people of his own nationality." - Is Malina a person or a place? "Ukrainian authors, on the other hand ... accuse only Poles (or Uzbeks as well) of aiding in the crime" conveys the meaning better if it is amended to "aiding the SS in" "lists the names of only Czech victims" - should have 'the' between only and Czech
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	This is quite a bit of background for the topic at hand. The separation of genesis and background in unorthodox. I propose that you combine hte two section and significantly cut down on the history. Lead section could use some expanding but I recommend doing that at the end.
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 fact of the crime was first mentioned in UPA leaflets in September 1943" -- verified "after being locked in barns, mainly in Josef Dobry's farmyard, were burnt" -- verified, however the ref should go to page 6 "374 Czechs, 132 Ukrainians and 26 Poles." -- verified, the article seems to mostly speak of individual victims as belonging to a single national identity. The parts of McBride that are cited do the same. However, I would expect a priori for some of the victims to have multi-cultural identities. Maybe there is material that supports that notation? Curiously, there seems to be more weight given to potential multi-cultural identities of the perpetrators. Is "Genocide committed by Ukrainian nationalists against the Polish population of Volhynia" in Polish? I am having trouble finding an English copy. "History Teaches a Lesson, published in 1986, the Soviet publisher committed forgery by correcting the content of the document (Bishop Platon's letter) so that it identified "Ukrainian nationalists" as the perpetrators of the Malin crime" - cites page 25, should be 27 "The version stating that the village was pacified in retaliation for supporting the Ukrainian nationalist underground, according to Jared McBride, is not supported by any evidence" -- verified
	2c. it contains no original research.	Claims are well sourced. Spot checks will double check this.
	2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.	Earwig sees no issues.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.	Multiple times the article references the need for German sources. Do these sources not exist? Why are they not included in the article? I would expect some weight on discussion not only of the national identity of the victims but the religious identity as well. For example when investigating the motivation of the massacre quotes like this one, from McBride, peak my interest: "While there are no specific accounts of Malyn’s Czechs harboring Jews, postwar Jewish testimony routinely mentions the heroism of Volhynian Czechs in helping Volhynian Jews." Or, "One of the reports curiously blamed a “Jew doctor” for “provoking” the Germans into attacking the village, after which he managed to escape to Olyka. On the contrary, the aforementioned doctor was burned alive—along with his wife and two children—during the massacre." McBride makes a point on page 21 that it is not surprising that Ukrainian civilians/police would be involved in the crime given the ratios of Germans to Ukrainian civilians. I think some summary of this would aid a reader that is not familiar with that history and help serve to discredit the idea that the "German Fascists" acted alone
	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:
	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:
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.	No issues.
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.	"Volhynia during German occupation" Is presumably from the McBride book which is presumably not creative commons license. I don't think this can be reproduced without the publishers consent? - update, I see the original is CC-NC-ND the uploads should be re-tagged with the correct designation. Same with "Church during Malin Massacre" and other works from McBride
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	Looks good
	7. Overall assessment.