Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Marian Rejewski

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Marian Rejewski

An article on the Polish codebreaker who solved the German Enigma machine, a result of a collaborative effort by a number of editors (including myself). Hopefully it's now suitable to be a Featured Article. It's been through Peer Review, and I've also asked off-site experts to look it over. — Matt Crypto 00:05, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

  • Support. The article looks very good, has fantastic detail, ample references. The only areas where I could suggest improvement would be to redistribute the description of the Enigma machine itself into other sections of the article, if possible. Also, I'm not an expert on references/notes/inline citations, but they look fine to me. However, someone should look over them to make sure they're in line with other recent featured articles. RyanGerbil10 01:56, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Support. Excellent job by Matt, Logologist and others. Although I'd prefer for the Harvard style references to be transformed into footnotes, this is a really minor issue - the main thing is that there are some inline references.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 03:10, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Support. Very nice article. I think the organization of the enigma machine material is great, because you can reference back to it as needed. I do think the last section isn't as well written, and needs to be merged into cohesive paragraphs. One and two sentence paragraphs don't flow as well. I'm just assuming you'll do this since the rest of the article is quite well done. - Taxman Talk 03:58, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Oppose the lead is a too long considering the length of the article - a should probably be cut back to two or at most three summary paragraphs, see Wikipedia:Lead section. Fair use image Image:SekretEnigmyRejewski.jpg needs to be tagged {{Non-free fair use in}} and a fair use rationale provided. In text note seven hasn't been incorporated into the notes list messing up the numbering. There are also several single sentence paragraphs that should be absorded into longer sections. A question (I'm not opposing on this point) wht use the Harvard system, which is not suited to this kind of writing, in place of somthing link innote or a numbered ref/not system for inline cites?--nixie 04:42, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
    • The lead is now three paras. I think the lenght of it is fine - it fits on one screen (with image), so why make it shorter? I have updated the pic with this tag and rationale, although I am not sure if it is not mutually exclusive with the current {{film-screenshot}}? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 06:05, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
      • Support, all objections addressed--nixie 22:26, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Conditional support, great article very close to FA but, my comments:
    1. The whole article needs some 'word therapy' (to steal Tony's phrase) before it will satisfy 2a (e.g "who pioneered decryption of German Enigma ciphers"; "which had up to that point thwarted all the Bureau's attempts to crack it"; "After the fall of France in June 1940, following a hiatus the Polish team resumed work in southern, Vichy France until the "Free Zone" was occupied by Germany in November 1942"; "There were an astronomical number of possible configurations, changed daily"; "in his attack on Enigma"; "But first another snag had to be overcome"; "to routinely break"; "to rapidly determine" etc. etc.)
    2. In need of references:
      "After only a few weeks he had completely solved the secret internal wiring of the Enigma"
      "Rejewski worked some twelve hours a week in an underground vault, close to the Mathematics Institute, named the "Black Chamber." (several other unrefed statements in that section)
      Quotes require page numbers, so "the theorem that won World War II" (Good and Deavours, 1981)" needs a page number.
      "He would later comment in 1980 that it was still not known whether such a set of six equations was solvable without further data."
      (Welchman, 1982, p. 289) (Singh, 1999, p. 160) should be (Welchman, 1982, p. 289; Singh, 1999, p. 160)
      Most of "Post-war life and recognition" needs references
    3. It shouldn't be "used by the Kriegsmarine, the German Navy" but rather "used by the German Navy"
    4. Why is the block quote under "Methods for solving the daily Enigma settings" in italics?
    5. Note 7 is an external link (and it shouldn't be, covert it to an inline citation) Mikkerpikker 04:57, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Support. Would prefer footnote-style references as well, but that may be the mtter of taste, I guess. --Lysy (talk) 08:43, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Support. Kudos to Logologist, Matt, Lysy et al for great work!--SylwiaS | talk 12:07, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Support. Although Image:Dyplom Rejewskiego.jpg has no indication as to why it is in the public domain, I think that this article is very well written and would make a great Featured Article.Image:Weather rain.pngSoothingR 14:27, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
    • Comment Any copyright is expired. The paper depicted is (just barely) over 100 years old. (I don't know what month "sierpnia" is, but the 16th of that month 1905 is over 100 years ago.) - Cuivienen 03:24, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
Sierpień = August, so it's 100 years and 5 months old.--SylwiaS | talk 19:31, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
  • {{Support}} Halibutt 19:13, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Object. This is very good. I have a slight problem with the references sections. You have a notes section, a footnotes section, then references, then external links, which is confusing. What is the references section exactly, as opposed to footnotes? And in the footnotes citations section, you don't give full citations, so I'm just wondering what is what. That's my only objection though. It's a great article, and very well written. SlimVirgin (talk) 09:41, 26 January 2006 (UTC)