# Talk:Nástup

This review is transcluded from Talk:Nástup/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: The Most Comfortable Chair (talk · contribs) 05:15, 1 October 2020 (UTC)
Hello. I will complete the review in a day or two. Thank you. — The Most Comfortable Chair 05:15, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for your review! (t · c) buidhe 09:50, 3 October 2020 (UTC)


### Lead
Should "Nástup faction" be "Nástup faction", as it is elsewhere in the prose?
Made it consistently non-italicized. The names of political factions are not usually italicized, and it would be odd to italicize "Nástup faction" but not "Nástupists".
"Israeli historian Yetayashu Jelínek [de] described Nástup as offering "a sui generis brand of extreme rightist ideology" because it insisted on an independent (as opposed to pro-German) foreign policy," — This sentence is an exact copy of a sentence in "Content". Perhaps it could be summarized in a different manner?
Done


### History
Optional — But I would recommend using an image of one of the prominent people associated with the magazine here, with a caption focusing on their role. Since the article has just one image, I believe this would be a good addition.
Not done: I would add a photograph of Durcansky if such existed (since he was the founder), but for the other figures (given that there is not space enough for all), showing a picture of them would tend to create undue weight to their role in the paper.
"Historian Sabine Witt" — Mention nationality before "historian" as it is done for Jelínek.
Unfortunately, I could not find any verifiable source for her nationality.
"editor of the Slovak People's Party's main publication, Slovák" — "Slovák" could be linked as Slovák.
Done
"forcing the organizers to allow Andrej Hlinka to speak." — Perhaps a little note explaining why he was not allowed to speak would work here. Something like "Andrej Hlinka to speak, who was previously..." will provide context.
Done
"in which the Germans targeted the Nástup faction." — A brief note on why they did so would go well here, since they seemed to agree and disagree on specific topics.
Done
A line or two on when and why it got discontinued in 1945 should be included.
Actually, that was a typo. It was discontinued in 1940, presumably because of the Salzburg affair, but no source supports this directly.


### Content
"It opposed support for Edvard Beneš in the 1935 Czechoslovak presidential election" — could it just be "It opposed Edvard Beneš in the 1935 Czechoslovak presidential election"?
Specifically, it opposed the idea that Slovak People's Party should support Benes. Clarified.
"By 1939, the paper was quoting The Eternal Jew" — The film was released in 1940, so it should not be correct to use "by 1939", unless I am missing something.
Lorman must be mistaken about that. I replaced with something else from him
"Nástup advocated for a racial definition for the Slovak nation" — Link "ethnonationalism" or introduce the word somewhere in the prose, since it is mentioned in the lead.
Done


### Sources
Optional — a few sources can be linked to Google Books for their title.
That should be all for now. It has been a good read and it should pass. Regards. — The Most Comfortable Chair 07:57, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for your review! Much appreciated. (t · c) buidhe 09:50, 3 October 2020 (UTC)


### Final
GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
It is reasonably well written.
a (prose, spelling, and grammar):  b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): 

It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (reference section):  b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):  d (copyvio and plagiarism): 

It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects):  b (focused): 

It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias: 

It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.: 

It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales):  b (appropriate use with suitable captions): 

Overall:
Pass/Fail: 
The article is a short and well-written, and it meets the criteria. Thank you for another fine article on World War II! — The Most Comfortable Chair 10:53, 3 October 2020 (UTC)