This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Emilie Schindler article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Emilie Schindler received a peer review by Wikipedia editors, which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article. |
i noticed that on Emilie Schindler's wikipedia page it says she and her husband, Oskar Schindler, saved 1,200 Jews whilst on Oskar's page it says they saved 1,100. I found a source that said they saved 1,300 Jews. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.49.32.151 ( talk) 00:19, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
References
The opening paragraphs struck me as somewhat odd in that they seem to minimise Oskar Schindler's efforts in favour of Emilie's. "Her efforts were THE inspiration" for Schindler's Ark and Schindler's List? I wouldn't say she was "the" (only) inspiration. The first paragraph also makes it sound like she was the sole saviour of the Schindler Jews. The second one just makes Oskar sound like a bad guy who was along for the ride.
This is how the intro reads to me anyway. Maybe the wording could be altered to be more clear and correct? —Preceding unsigned comment added by MatttK ( talk • contribs) 05:18, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
I saw your post requesting reassessment. It's well down on the list, but I thought I'd offer you some comments, not specifically (formally) reassessment.
First, let me say that your interest and enthusiasm for the subject is clear from the way you've worked this article. It's always good, when taking on a project, to have a love for it. That said, however, you have some problems to overcome.
The foremost of these is your overly familiar style. Encyclopedic style probably would use the subject's last names, not their first, unless you were quoting something that your subject said about her husband, Oskar. To refer to them throughout with their first names is probably too familiar. I agree with the unsigned (MatttK) above -- your wording in the intro is quite ambiguous. The titles of the books would be best in italics (by surrounding the title with two ... one on each end of the title) so that you get a text like this Plus you need the dates of the books, so there is no confusion over which ones you mean. Rosenberg wrote Ich, Oskar, and Ich, Emilie, and it needs distinguishing.
Second, you really need a good copy edit on this. I suggest the guild of copy editors if you don't feel up to doing it yourself. You might also print out the article (that's possible using the links on the left column) and mark it up, then make changes in edit mode.
Okay, so in summary, good things: citations, very nice, although you should check the Wikipedia Manual of style for consistency. Some pictures, also very nice, with captions, very nice also. Problems: over familiarity in referring to subject, prose is awkward and hard to read.
Nice work so far! Good luck with this! :) -- Auntieruth55 ( talk) 02:57, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
I found one more thing, too. Alt Moletein? I found a Alt-Moletein, Starý Maletín, which now appears on a map as Moletin. 49°48' N 16°47' E, about 1.5 miles from New-Moletin, and about 100 miles from Prague? -- Auntieruth55 ( talk) 03:06, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
An image used in this article,
File:Oskar&Emilie 1946.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at
Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations
Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.
To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Oskar&Emilie 1946.jpg) This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image -- CommonsNotificationBot ( talk) 19:22, 5 March 2012 (UTC) |
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Emilie Schindler article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Emilie Schindler received a peer review by Wikipedia editors, which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article. |
i noticed that on Emilie Schindler's wikipedia page it says she and her husband, Oskar Schindler, saved 1,200 Jews whilst on Oskar's page it says they saved 1,100. I found a source that said they saved 1,300 Jews. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.49.32.151 ( talk) 00:19, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
References
The opening paragraphs struck me as somewhat odd in that they seem to minimise Oskar Schindler's efforts in favour of Emilie's. "Her efforts were THE inspiration" for Schindler's Ark and Schindler's List? I wouldn't say she was "the" (only) inspiration. The first paragraph also makes it sound like she was the sole saviour of the Schindler Jews. The second one just makes Oskar sound like a bad guy who was along for the ride.
This is how the intro reads to me anyway. Maybe the wording could be altered to be more clear and correct? —Preceding unsigned comment added by MatttK ( talk • contribs) 05:18, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
I saw your post requesting reassessment. It's well down on the list, but I thought I'd offer you some comments, not specifically (formally) reassessment.
First, let me say that your interest and enthusiasm for the subject is clear from the way you've worked this article. It's always good, when taking on a project, to have a love for it. That said, however, you have some problems to overcome.
The foremost of these is your overly familiar style. Encyclopedic style probably would use the subject's last names, not their first, unless you were quoting something that your subject said about her husband, Oskar. To refer to them throughout with their first names is probably too familiar. I agree with the unsigned (MatttK) above -- your wording in the intro is quite ambiguous. The titles of the books would be best in italics (by surrounding the title with two ... one on each end of the title) so that you get a text like this Plus you need the dates of the books, so there is no confusion over which ones you mean. Rosenberg wrote Ich, Oskar, and Ich, Emilie, and it needs distinguishing.
Second, you really need a good copy edit on this. I suggest the guild of copy editors if you don't feel up to doing it yourself. You might also print out the article (that's possible using the links on the left column) and mark it up, then make changes in edit mode.
Okay, so in summary, good things: citations, very nice, although you should check the Wikipedia Manual of style for consistency. Some pictures, also very nice, with captions, very nice also. Problems: over familiarity in referring to subject, prose is awkward and hard to read.
Nice work so far! Good luck with this! :) -- Auntieruth55 ( talk) 02:57, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
I found one more thing, too. Alt Moletein? I found a Alt-Moletein, Starý Maletín, which now appears on a map as Moletin. 49°48' N 16°47' E, about 1.5 miles from New-Moletin, and about 100 miles from Prague? -- Auntieruth55 ( talk) 03:06, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
An image used in this article,
File:Oskar&Emilie 1946.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at
Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations
Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.
To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Oskar&Emilie 1946.jpg) This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image -- CommonsNotificationBot ( talk) 19:22, 5 March 2012 (UTC) |