Part two
Hi
Actualcpscm, well done dealing with the points for the first section of the article, below are some points covering the next part. Obviously same rules as previously. Thanks,--
Llewee (
talk)
18:36, 24 June 2023 (UTC)
reply
Early sections
- On the sentence you asked for advice on, I would say a better way of wording it might be "De Maizière was impressed with the way Merkel handled journalists investigating Schnur's role in the Stasi."
Done. That's much better, thanks!
- [68] is this a reliable source?
Checking... I've commented out the paragraph in question until I get around to this.
Done, found a better source and amended the paragraph.
Early political career (part two)
- "2000–2018: Chairperson of the CDU" - I understand this name reflects the time period she was in the position for but it is slightly confusing given the section only covers the period before she became leader of the opposition.
Done
- "the CDU was not able to win in subsequent state elections" this reads a bit odd, change "was not able" to "did not"
Done
- "As early as February 2001," change "As early as" to "From", the reader has no reason to believe that February 2001 is especially early or late.
Done
- "her rival Friedrich Merz had made clear", I don't think "had" is needed here.
Done
- "She was subsequently outmaneuvered politically by CSU Leader Edmund Stoiber," It might be good to clarify what happened here
Done; funny enough, it was almost like the opposite of that. Really interesting story.
- "He went on to squander a large lead in opinion polls", the word "squander" comes across as a moral judgement change it to something like "He went on to lose" or "In spite of".
Done
- "a razor-thin margin" I would change this to something less dramatic e.g "small margin"
Done
- "Merkel supported a substantial reform agenda for Germany's economic and social system" rather than linking to the page
reform movement it may be more helpful to link the phrase "reform agenda" to the page
Agenda 2010 on the relevant reforms.
Done
- "She advocated German labour law changes," a link to the page
German labour law may be helpful here.
Done
- "Merkel won the CDU/CSU nomination as challenger to Chancellor Gerhard Schröder", change "as" to "to be"
Done
- "of the second votes to the SPD's 34.2%." It might be good to clarify what "second votes" means
Done
Chancellor of Germany
- "severely undermined his position as a Merkel rival." change "Merkel rival" to "rival of Merkel"
Done removed this paragraph entirely, it's unsourced here as well as in the article on stoiber (both the english and german version). coulnd't find any good sources and it doesn't seem particularly relevant here
- [89] doesn't cite most of the text before it
Question: Since I reworked much of the text, which citation / part of the text is this referring to?
Done, since the section was rewritten almost entirely. It's now in much better shape, and this sourcing issue is no longer a concern.
- "The second Cabinet of Angela Merkel was sworn in on 28 October 2009." not clear why this is here
Done
- "2005–2009: First CDU–SPD grand coalition" This section focuses on the establishment of the government. It would be good to include more information on what she and her government did between 2005 and 2009. Did they achieve their promises? How did they respond to events (e.g the 2008 recession)?
Done
- Also, this section is a bit confused/repetitive and could do with a reorganisation generally.
Done
- "39 percent Seehofer (CSU), 35 percent Gabriel (SPD), 32 percent Schulz (SPD), 25 percent Özdemir (Greens), 20 percent Wagenknecht (Left Party), 15 percent Lindner (FDP), and just 10 percent Petry (AfD)" I don't think it necessary to list the figures for all these opposition politicians.
Done
- In general throughout this section their is a focus on elections and forming coalitions without much information on what happened in-between.
Question: I think this raises an important general question for articles about politicians (an area of interest for me); in terms of their structure, should they separate History and Policy (like here), or should they be combined? I suggest we agree on a general approach for this article before I start moving stuff around. I don't mind the separation, but what do you think?
Actualcpscm (
talk)
10:48, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
reply
- I take the view that a "political positions" sections is for a politician's general policies and political views. Readers will expect their response to specific events to be in the main timeline of their career and specific positions will often interactive with their career. For instance in
Ruth Davidson, a article on a far more minor politician I recently improved to good article status, the "Leadership of the Scottish Conservative Party" section includes subsections on the Scottish independence referendum and Brexit referendum as well as touching on her political positions when relevant. The "policies and views" section goes into more detail.--
Llewee (
talk)
14:11, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
reply
- That makes sense, thanks. I'll work on that soon.
Actualcpscm (
talk)
11:32, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
reply
Done
Actualcpscm (
talk)
12:32, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
reply
Political positions
- "This has added to a growing debate within Germany on the levels of immigration, its effect on Germany and the degree to which Muslim immigrants have integrated into German society"- change to past tense
Done
- "2015 European migrant crisis", "2018 asylum government crisis", "COVID-19 pandemic", "Eurozone crisis" and "Succession", I'd suggest moving these section on events into the main section on her chancellorship.
Done
- " Merkel repeatedly highlighted a need for cooperation between EU member states," change "highlighted a need for" to "encouraged"
Done
- "She coined the phrase Wir schaffen das ("We'll manage this")..." I assume this was a reference to Germany specifically not the EU in general in which case this sentence may fit better at the end of the next paragraph where it might fit better.
Done
- "Seehofer estimated as many as 30 percent of asylum seekers" change "estimated" to "believed"
Done
- " for migrants with low chances to get asylum approved" change "to get" to "of getting approved for"
Done
- "The issues are in conflict" change to "The issue caused a conflict"
Done
- "the SPD who opposes them" change to past tense
Done
- "a reevaluation of German officials' stance", if this just means government ministers then say that
Done
- "There appeared to be a consensus among officials," according to who?
Done
- "Literature argued that the increased right-wing preferences" clarify what "Literature" refers to
Done
- "the European migrant crisis which has brought thousands of people, predominantly from Muslim countries to Germany," this repeating information already given
Done
- "A policy Seehofer announced is that he has a" change this to "Seehofer announced that he had a"
Done
- "who have already been deported" change "have" to "had"
Done
- "Seehofer backed down from a threat to bypass her in the disagreement over immigration policy" clarify how he was planning to bypass her
Done
- "and to negotiate bilateral agreements with the specific countries himself." maybe add a footnote clarifying why he had the power to do this
Done, in a way. Since I rewrote these sentences, that would no longer be necessary.
- "established a crisis team to create containment policy." add an "a" before "containment"
Done
- "Eurozone Crisis" I would suggest expanding this section as from an outside perspective it was one of the most significant and controversial periods of her chancellorship
Done, unless you think more is needed there (?)
- "Since then, this comparison has become a" change to "After this, the comparison became a"
Done
- "International status" I think this section could probably be balanced with a bit criticism.
Checking... There might not be that much, I think she has largely received praised on an international level, but I'll investigate to make sure the section reflects reporting in a balanced way
Done, see below.
- I would also say that some of the language used in this section can come across a bit non-neutral.
Question: Do you mean the "international status" subsection or the entire "political positions" section?
- I mean the throughout the political positions section.
-
Checking...
Done, I think. I cut back on the praise a little and introduced some criticism into the "international status" section (now "legacy"). given the sheer volume of praise she has received, I would hesitate to add more criticism in that section, though (cf.
WP:FALSEBALANCE). If you think there are still NPOV issues, could you point out a more specific problem area for me to look at?
Actualcpscm (
talk)
20:47, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
reply
|