Talk:Zyklon B/GA1

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: Ritchie333 (talk · contribs) 15:48, 3 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I will review.

As I expected for such an emotionally charged topic, the talk page has had numerous comments about its neutrality and comprehensiveness. Against that, I notice that the article appears to have had a substantial rewrite since complaints about "bitterness and ax-granding" in June, which is good to see. So I am happy that in its current state, the article is stable and will hopefully continue to be.

Lead[edit]

The caption on the opening image could be expanded to show some of the German wording, with English translations Y
Should we not have the English pronunciation as well as the German?Y
The second sentence can simply say "It" instead of repeating the noun.Y
The lead stops at 1946. It could do with a concluding sentence saying what has happened since then (presumably its continued production as Cyanosil and widespread banning and condemnation).Y
At four paragraphs, the lead is a bit too long. For a 13K article, I would suggest you probably want to be looking at two paragraphs.
- I've trimmed it down to three shorter paragraphs, but don't want to cut it any further. Please check and see if you think this is adequate. -- Diannaa (talk) 22:46, 3 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Mechanism[edit]

Worth considering Cyanide poisoning as a "See also"?Y
I am a little concerned with not personally having enough of a scientific background to confirm the biological effects are correct, but from my basic understanding of cyanides, there is nothing here that looks obviously challenging.
- I have the source book coming on inter-library loan, and will verify this content when it arrives. -- Diannaa (talk) 22:46, 3 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
" In a human weighing 68 kilograms" - is it important whether the subject is male or female, or is that not known?
- The source does not specify the sex of the example subject. Hopefully there's further details in Lehninger Principles of Biochemistry; I will check when it arrives. -- Diannaa (talk) 22:46, 3 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

History[edit]

Hydrogen cyanide, discovered in the 1700s, was used in the 1880s" - suggest "Hydrogen cyanide was discovered in the 1700s and used in the 1880s". Can you confirm you specifically mean the first decade of the 18th century by "1700s"?
- I meant the latter part of the century, so I've changed to to read "late 18th century" to remove the ambuguity. -- Diannaa (talk) 22:46, 3 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
"railroad cars" - this is US English, but earlier we have referred to the non-US "68 kilograms". I don't mind which version of English is used though, provided it's consistent.Y
Worth mentioning when exactly Degesch was formed, to give some context to what "wartime uses" means.
- World War I was already over, so they were researching for military use in general. So I have fixed this up a bit. Also I noticed that Zyklon A itself was not used in WWI (it was a similar HCN formulation), so I corrected that. -- Diannaa (talk) 22:46, 3 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Corporate structure and marketing[edit]

"Degussa retained managerial control of Degesch" - I don't think we need "of Degesch", this can be inferred from context.Y
Do we know why American Cyanamid stopped manufacturing Zyklon B in 1943? Had they become aware of its use in Nazi Germany by then?
- I haven't found any information on this point. One would have to assume that since by 1943 Germany and the US were at war, their license was not renewed. -- Diannaa (talk) 22:46, 3 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The two sentences in this section related to the Holocaust fit better in the following section Y

Use by Nazi Germany as a method of mass murder[edit]

I think "Use in the Holocaust" would be suitable as a title. It's shorter, and I would trust the average reader to be aware of associating it with mass extermination.Y
For consistency with the rest of the article, Auschwitz-Birkenau and Majdanek should be linked on first use (related to last point in the preceding section).Y
A brief explanation of Sonderkommando would be useful Y
It would be worthwhile mentioning when this method stopped, presumably in early 1945 as camps began to be liberated? Y

Legacy[edit]

The due weight for holocaust deniers sounds about right.
The section about trademarking could be expanded a little bit, using the BBC News sources supplied. Y

Summary[edit]

This is a well written article, and I can only find minor comments, so I'll put the review on hold pending resolution of those. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 16:08, 3 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- @Ritchie333:, thank you for reviewing this article. I have made the suggested improvements (please let me know if I missed anything), and await your response. -- Diannaa (talk) 22:46, 3 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That all looks good. The only concern is the scientific information, but it is verifiable to a good source, and you are awaiting further sources for more verification, so I'm happy that the article's quality is going to be upheld. So I'll pass the review. Well done. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 12:21, 4 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again! -- Diannaa (talk) 15:28, 4 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]