Talk:Klaus Reichenbach/GA2

"Life § de Maizière Government", paragraph (¶) 1

• "Reichenbach's ministerial position corresponded to the position of Head of the Federal Chancellery, which was held at that time by Rudolf Seiters. Reichenbach and Seiters met in Bonn on 26 April 1990.": It feels like these two sentences can be worded better, as the fact on when Reichenbach and Seiters met feels loose in the paragraph. Do you think you can rewrite these sentences in a more connective and sensible manner? — Alex26337 ^(talk) 08:25, 3 February 2026 (UTC)
• The issue presented was not resolved in time: Failed

• While weighted words and phrases are quoted appropriately, and the overall layout is acceptable, the list in the "de Maizière Government" section will have to be rewritten or omitted altogether, as explained in sub-criteria #2b and #3b. Due to this issue not being resolved in time, along with the other issues that call for an alternate prose, this article does not meet the standards of this sub-criteria: Failed

• All the references are contained at the end of the article in a single, representative section. There are no issues pertaining to this sub-criteria that present themselves, and it doesn't seem like they'll develop during this review: Pass

Citational Issues

(Reviewer's note: To avoid confusion, all reference numbers will nominally refer to this revision of the article.)

• Ref. #1b: While the citation does present the claim on founding the CDU in 1946, it does not support the claim's absence in other sources or news outlets. To fix this, you can either find another source that can be placed to support this, or remove the second part of the sentence (i.e., "..., but this claim is unsubstantiated elsewhere"). — Alex26337 ^(talk) 05:37, 2 February 2026 (UTC)
• Ref. #1c: The only area this citation does not support in its sentence is the information on Wolperndorf being incorporated into Jückelberg. I feel like the parenthesized note is a good anchor for those familiar enough with the area or knowledge of Germany, but you will need to find another reference to support this claim. — Alex26337 ^(talk) 05:37, 2 February 2026 (UTC)
• Ref. #1h: This citation partially represents its sentence; do you think you can apply another reference pertaining to how "bloc-party membership functioned as a signal of political reliability in the GDR"? If there's a reference in the article that supports this, you can decide to use it; it just needs to be linked to the sentence. — Alex26337 ^(talk) 05:37, 2 February 2026 (UTC)
• Ref. #1k & #2h: The citations for this sentence are mostly okay, however, I want to point out a certain issue with this sentence. While the sources verify that Klaus worked with Lothar de Maizière, and that he was a Minister-President, they lack the fact that he was part of a cabinet. I feel like this may be general knowledge to those familiar enough with the article, but to those without such insight, this fact must be properly mentioned in a third source. — Alex26337 ^(talk) 05:37, 2 February 2026 (UTC)
• Ref. #1l & #9b: While reference #9b supports this sentence, I don't see any information partaking to it in reference #1l, so this reference will need to be removed from the sentence. — Alex26337 ^(talk) 05:37, 2 February 2026 (UTC)
• Ref. #2d & #3f: I've noticed two problems with the two sentences associated with these two citations. For citation #2d, I believe it is best to move it to the sentence ending with reference #3f, since it alone does not support all the information in the first sentence. As for the second sentence, there is no information in these two references pertaining to when exactly his father died, but only when Klaus took over his company. You will either have to rewrite the sentence, or add another reference containing the information appropriately. — Alex26337 ^(talk) 18:31, 2 February 2026 (UTC)
• Ref. #2e, #3j, & #7c: From the collective information of these three references, it states that he started this position in June, not July, and there was no specific day listed. Could you rewrite the first phrase of the sentence so that it states the correct month in the correct format? — Alex26337 ^(talk) 18:31, 2 February 2026 (UTC)

  Yg Due to this being a relatively minor issue, I was able to resolve this via copyediting. — Alex26337 ^(talk) 21:28, 2 February 2026 (UTC)

• Ref. #2g, #3l, #4d, & #7e: I believe that references #2g, #4d, & #7e should be placed at the end of the sentence with reference #3l, since #3l supports the information on Constituency 8. — Alex26337 ^(talk) 18:31, 2 February 2026 (UTC)
• Ref. #2i: From this reference, there doesn't seem to be information pertaining to how he does his job, but only the titles that he worked under. Can you replace this with a more suitable reference? — Alex26337 ^(talk) 18:31, 2 February 2026 (UTC)
• Ref. #2j, #3m, & #4e: None of the references include information on the total number of members (144) in the Volkskammer. You'll have to find another reference to support this or remove the number from the sentence. — Alex26337 ^(talk) 18:31, 2 February 2026 (UTC)

  Yg Due to this being a relatively minor issue, I was able to resolve this via copyediting. — Alex26337 ^(talk) 21:28, 2 February 2026 (UTC)

• Ref. #3g, #7a, & #8: While the references mention Reichenbach as an operations manager and director, it does not mention that he is a chairman, so him being a "chairman" will have to be removed from the sentence. Additionally, none of the references mentions that he was the director of other state-owned companies, but only the one owned by his father. Due to this, you will either have to find a reference supporting this information, or remove the second part of the sentence. — Alex26337 ^(talk) 21:02, 2 February 2026 (UTC)

  I managed to slightly resolve this, since all it took was a minor copyedit. However, the remainder of this issue will need to be resolved through another authority. — Alex26337 ^(talk) 21:28, 2 February 2026 (UTC)

• Ref. #3h & #4b: These references don't hold information pertaining to when his father died, nor do they hold information about the CDU now belonging to the SED. You will need to find and link references supporting this information. — Alex26337 ^(talk) 21:02, 2 February 2026 (UTC)
• Ref. #5b: The retrieval date in the citation does not pertain to the actual reference date to which this information was last updated. This sentence will have to be reworded to express that the company's return to privacy was established in 1997. — Alex26337 ^(talk) 22:07, 2 February 2026 (UTC)
• Ref. #9a: There is no information pertaining to Reichenbach being a deputy chairman in this reference. Unless you can prove that the information is within this citation, the sentence will either have to be removed, or have its citation replaced. — Alex26337 ^(talk) 06:36, 3 February 2026 (UTC)
• Ref. #9d: Reichenbach was NOT the one who coordinated the negotiations; that task, according to this reference, was handled by other politicians. Unless a replacement reference can verify the information here, this sentence will have to be removed, and the section its in will most likely need to be reworded. — Alex26337 ^(talk) 06:36, 3 February 2026 (UTC)
• Ref. #12: This reference fails to support the two sentences preceding it, so it will need to be replaced with a verifiable one. — Alex26337 ^(talk) 06:36, 3 February 2026 (UTC)
• Ref. #13a: This reference does not support information Kurt Biedenkopf being a chairman of North Rhine-Westphalia's CDU, nor does it support that he was a candidate in October 1990. You will have to find another reference to verify these parts of the sentence. — Alex26337 ^(talk) 06:36, 3 February 2026 (UTC)
• Ref. #13d: The parenthesized note will require another reference to support it, as this one does not verify such information. — Alex26337 ^(talk) 06:36, 3 February 2026 (UTC)

Additional Issues

• In the infobox, I am concerned about the date he was active as a minister president. While I was able to verify the month and year in the citations I've reviewed, I could not verify the date. I understand that in the infoboxes, references to information aren't necessarily listed, since they are later verified in the prose. However, the fact that I could not find the information pertaining to the "day" he entered and left office, is a problem.

In order to resolve this issue, I suggest you either omit the day from his office position, or find and properly include a source pertaining to it within the article. If you do find a source, please point it out to me, so I can see if it can speak for this information. — Alex26337 ^(talk) 06:36, 3 February 2026 (UTC)

• In the "de Maizière Government" section, I believe it would be best to add reference #7 to the image's caption to support it. Do you think you can apply this citation to it? (I would do it myself, but I want you to be aware that doing this will shift the reference numbers a bit, which can make it confusing if you don't already know which issues are tied to where in the article. Also, as the reviewer, I can only take so much responsibility.) — Alex26337 ^(talk) 08:25, 3 February 2026 (UTC)
• The active issues listed here were not resolved in time: Failed

• There were issues relevant to this sub-criteria listed in the other cells, which were not resolved in time: Failed

• "...to his father in Hartmannsdorf, where the family owned a textile factory." – This phrase is a close translated deviation from its citation's article (Ref. #1d). As per the FAQ on Wikipedia's copyright policy pertaining to this situation, the information cannot be included in this form. You will need to rewrite this sentence to abide to this. — Alex26337 ^(talk) 05:37, 2 February 2026 (UTC)
• The list of issues were not resolved in time: Failed

• While there are issues with the prose, the main areas on this person are at least presented in the article: Pass

• While the majority of the article is okay, there are issues in the "de Maizière Government" section that make some unnecessary details stand out. This certain issue also counts as a prse and reference issue, which is further explained in sub-criteria #2b's cell (Ref. #9d). Due to this, the article does not meet the standards of this sub-criteria #3b: Failed

While there are unresolved issues pertaining to the prose of this article, the overall bias is contained, and the perspectives presented are not overweighted in any concerning ways: Pass

• There were no recent signs of edit disputes or warring, and the majority of eits were directed to the improvement of this article. No other issues pertaining to this criteria are present: Pass

• The images have been checked and are either in the public domain or released under Germany's CC BY-SA 3.0 license. Additionally, the boxed-in quote is properly referenced and used in a minimal degree. No further issues are present with this sub-criteria: Pass

• The images, their captions, and the quote box have a satisfactory relevance to the article in their own right. Although a recommendation has been raised pertaining to the use of citations in one of the captions, the caption itself maintains its relevancy regardless. Considering this, and the fact that no other issues present themselves, I believe the article is up to standard with this sub-criteria: Pass