Talk:Pullapää crisis

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Pullapää crisis article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Pullapää crisis was a Social sciences and society good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
October 9, 2007	Good article nominee	Not listed

Estonia Mid‑importance

Pullapää crisis is part of WikiProject Estonia, a project to maintain and expand Estonia-related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.EstoniaWikipedia:WikiProject EstoniaTemplate:WikiProject EstoniaEstonia articles

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

To-do list:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : WikiProject Estonia/Missing articles
Assess : Rate each tagged article by quality and importance to the WikiProject if it has not been done. (See Category:Unassessed Estonia articles)
Infobox : Add infoboxes to articles without it
Maintain : Portal:Estonia
Photo : Upload and/or add a photo to articles without it (See Category:Wikipedia requested photographs in Estonia)
Stubs : Add info to stub-articles and check for start-class.

Military history: Baltic states / European

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion not met

Associated task forces:
/
	Baltic states military history task force
	European military history task force

Concerns regarding the date of conviction[edit]

Based on various sources, it seems reliable that on 26 November 1993, Kommer was arrested, and his imprisonment was counted from that day. However, I am unsure that this was the day of his conviction, as several investigative procedures were performed later. I have not yet found a proper date of conviction, and although Postimees claims this was also the day of conviction, I suspect it is erroneously reporting the day of arrest as the day of conviction. Digwuren 01:23, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Failed "good article" nomination[edit]

This article failed good article nomination. This is how the article, as of October 9, 2007, compares against the six good article criteria:

1. Well written?:

The prose is mostly not very good. It suffers from redundancies ("influenced by a foreign power or foreign powers"), inappropriate colloquialisms ("announced they'd 'withdraw'") and poor syntax ("Made, nor any other politician (of 1993) has never been officially charged"), among other faults. Moreover, the article is difficult to understand for non-Estonian readers because it lacks the necessary context in the introduction: why was this event historically or politically significant?

2. Factually accurate?:

Unverifiable, because the article has only two (newspaper) sources, which are not cited inline. For an article that portrays the actions of living politicians unfavorably (see WP:BLP), that poor level of sourcing is unacceptable. Also, some sources at least should be in English.

3. Broad in coverage?:

Cannot be ascertained because of the lack of sources (see above).

4. Neutral point of view?:

Cannot be ascertained because of the lack of sources (see above). But we can't really have a section of "analysis" (whose analysis?) without any attribution (see WP:NOR).

5. Article stability?

A recent translation.

6. Images?:

The article has no images. (We don't have images of at least some of the people involved?)

When these issues are addressed, the article can be renominated. If you feel that this review is in error, feel free to take it to a Good article reassessment. Thank you for your work so far. — Sandstein 12:08, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]