Template:Did you know nominations/Internment of refugees in Soviet labor camps during World War II

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: withdrawn by nominator, closed by Narutolovehinata5 (talk) 14:13, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

Internment of refugees in the Soviet Union during World War II

(

)

... that large numbers of Jewish refugees from Poland actually benefited to some degree from being interned by the Soviet Union during World War 2, since that saved them from the Nazi Holocaust? Source: that Polish citizens who were interned by the Soviet Union at the start of World War 2 underwent a major status change when Nazi Germany invaded the Soviet Union, since they were now on the same side as the Soviets?
- Reviewed:

Created by Sm8900 (talk). Self-nominated at 19:48, 19 May 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Internment of refugees in Soviet labor camps during World War II; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.

Nomination seems to have been messed up, ALT Hook as source, and the hook doesn't even link to the article? Article is only barely past the minimum entry requirements. Also, what's up with the six references on the lead? It's a notable topic, surely they could be dispersed a bit with some more info added. The empty sections and sparsity of the overview sections needs fixing too. I think fix the article then resubmit. Frzzl talk · contribs 20:45, 19 May 2023 (UTC)
- @Sm8900: to add on, while the article is new enough and long enough, I'll second what Frzzl has said above about incompleteness. The article has a "This section is empty" tag, which at the very least needs to be resolved in order for this nomination to proceed. Actually, the second paragraph of "Jewish internees" has no sources at all; per the DYK rules, each paragraph in the body must have at least one citation. This nomination can still be promoted if you continue working on the article to resolve these issues within the next few days. Otherwise, if this nomination is failed or withdrawn, you'd have to expand the article fivefold or improve it to Good Article status for this article to become DYK-eligible again. Epicgenius (talk) 16:27, 20 May 2023 (UTC)

@Epicgenius and Frzzl: I greatly appreciate your feedback above. i have tried to revise and improve the article as per your suggestions and feedback. could you please let me know what you think of the current version, and revisions? thanks!! --Sm8900 (talk) 19:48, 21 May 2023 (UTC)

The article is better than before, but it still feels a bit incomplete at parts and would benefit from copyediting. For instance, I just picked a random sentence in the article, and it has two grammar errors: "As the war progressed and the NAzi invaders fgot further into the Soviet Union". There are also some places where it will be beneficial to add details, e.g. the "Life in the camps" section, which seems to be a list of facts rather than a coherent narrative. While these are not DYK eligibility criteria, fleshing out the text would benefit the article greatly. What is a DYK criterion is the issue that the hook fact does not appear to be mentioned in the article, let alone have a source. At the very least, you need to state the hook fact explicitly in the article and include a source at the end of the sentence where that fact is mentioned. I hope this feedback is helpful for you as you continue to improve the article. Epicgenius (talk) 22:32, 21 May 2023 (UTC)

@Epicgenius: hi. yes those are very helpful points. i'll try to get on top of those. thanks! --Sm8900 (talk) 16:11, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

Sm8900, Epicgenius, where does this nomination stand? It's been over a month since the last post here, and a status report would be welcome. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:48, 26 June 2023 (UTC)

@BlueMoonset and Epicgenius:, thanks for your helpful notes. i think I'd like to withdraw this nomination. I was hoping to highlight the lesser-known aspects of this historical topic; but then i found out that there was a signficant part of this refugee process which was totally brutal in nature, so I wanted to focus more on getting the historical details right. so i sort of focused on that part of this topic, rather than improving the article itself. so I'm fine if this proposal is withdrawn. thanks. --Sm8900 (talk) 17:04, 26 June 2023 (UTC)