Talk:Stephan Ludwig Roth/GA1

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

Nominator: Apollo468 (talk · contribs) 19:11, 28 August 2025 (UTC)

Reviewer: JammyDodger357 (talk · contribs) 18:37, 30 June 2026 (UTC)

Hi, I'm Jammy, and I am reviewing this article, Stephan Ludwig Roth. I must first applaud you on the quality of this article and the amount of effort that clearly went into this article, and your very impressive amount of skill and experience showcased here. I can in full confidence say that it easily passes the GA criteria. I also understand that it has been quite a while since you made this nomination, but I would still like to congratulate you on the effort. Below is the review, piece by piece.

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose, spelling, grammar, and understandability): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

   The article is well-written, and of high quality, lending brief introduction to several areas to aid the reader's understanding.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable, as shown by a source spot-check.

   a (reference section): b (inline citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):

   It is clear that this article was particularly well-researched and uses a wide range of reliable sources, while remaining free of any copyvio. Of particular note is the article's use of inline citations, which are used frequently and impressively.

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   It is a very long article, that pulls apart each part of his life and work, creating an in depth understanding of his life and viewpoints while not engaging in unnecessary tangents or information.

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

   It handles difficult topics, such as his antisemitic views, as well as his modern image as a liberal with confidence and care, creating a nuanced image with due proportion to each viewpoint.

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

   This article is well illustrated, with images that aid the reader's understanding, with appropriate captions explaining the connection.

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   Overall, this is an outstanding article, with clear effort and skill put into it, and I am happy to say that this is a GA.

While this easily passes the GA criteria, there are still levels above this. I believe that this article could become a featured article with a small amount of work, and I would greatly enjoy seeing you, or fellow editors, tackle that. Only 1 in 163 articles are GA, so it is a great achievement in any case.

- Jammy 18:37, 30 June 2026 (UTC)