Template:Did you know nominations/Jakobus Onnen: Difference between revisions

Line 58: Line 58:

*Pinging nominator and those who have previously raised concerns, feel free to ignore . {{ping|TouchedWithFire|MediaKyle|Gdeblois19|Chipmunkdavis|Bremps}} First I’d like to thank all the editors who raised concerns with the article and helped improve it, and TouchedWithFire for not getting disheartened and working on it. The article has undergone significant edits to ensure source text integrity and get it up to standard. I have just done a significant round of copyedits and formatting mostly, but I did not find any factually incorrect claims or issues with source-text integrity. I would like to get a second opinion to make sure I’m calling this right and no debilitating concerns remain before removing the banner. As for the hook issue raised, I think ”’ALT1a”’: … that historian [[Jürgen Matthäus]] used artificial intelligence to help identify ”'[[Jakobus Onnen]]”’ as the gunman in ”[[The Last Jew in Vinnitsa]]” ”(pictured)”? resolves it. Also, we should probably get a dummy edit to provide attribution to the .de article, but I have no clue on how to do that. [[User:1brianm7|””’1brianm7””']] ([[User talk:1brianm7|talk]]) 19:25, 10 November 2025 (UTC)

:: [[File:Symbol confirmed.svg|16px]] It’s been a week. the dummy edit was done [[User:1brianm7|””’1brianm7””']] ([[User talk:1brianm7|talk]]) 02:13, 18 November 2025 (UTC)

:::Apologies. I only recently learned that it’s necessary to write that the article was translated in the edit summary. In addition to the dummy edit by [[User:Bremps]], I added a “Translated page” template to the talkpage.

:[[File:Symbol possible vote.svg|16px]] When I promoted this, the only underlying issue was, I thought, the failed verification, and I was going to migrate the source somewhere else. However I have pulled it after some issues raised by {{ul|MediaKyle}}, mainly the underlying LLM generation (that may still have some hallucinations) and the difference in perspective from the dewiki article which portrays it from a broader point of view (while this article asserts that the gunman is Onnen, the German article isn’t that sure). The article needs more thorough checks of the sources before it can be approved. Pings: {{ul|TouchedWithFire}}, {{ul|Gdeblois19}}, {{ul|Chipmunkdavis}}, {{ul|Bremps}}, {{ul|1brianm7}} [[User:HurricaneZeta|”’Hurricane”']][[User talk:HurricaneZeta|”’Zeta”']][[Special:Contributions/HurricaneZeta|C]] 03:23, 6 December 2025 (UTC)

::Regarding the hooks, I removed the caption from the image as it violated [[WP:DYKIMG]]. ALT1 or ALT1a are both fine, but the issues above need to be fixed. [[User:HurricaneZeta|”’Hurricane”']][[User talk:HurricaneZeta|”’Zeta”']][[Special:Contributions/HurricaneZeta|C]] 03:30, 6 December 2025 (UTC)

Line 72: Line 73:

:::: I read the German article, and it has more detail about the fact that it was a relative of Onnen who was suspicious, and provided the historian with family photos. AI image analysis was used to compare the images. The wording in German is “In 2025, a research team led by the historian Jürgen Matthäus identified him as the suspected shooter …”. In German it’s “mutmaßlicher Schütze” (which Deepl gives first as “alleged shooter”) which is a legal term for someone not (yet) pronounced guilty, and we might do the same, in article and hook, and there may be a different term in English. We should not be afraid of copyvio because it has to be precise. –[[User:Gerda Arendt|Gerda Arendt]] ([[User talk:Gerda Arendt|talk]]) 06:54, 7 December 2025 (UTC)

::{{ping|ARandomName123}}I recall I was able to access it when I first reviewed the article, but I’ve had no luck in seeing it since then. [[User:1brianm7|””’1brianm7””']] ([[User talk:1brianm7|talk]]) 04:25, 7 December 2025 (UTC)

:::I too no longer have access to the Rheiderland.de article, but I added additional sources pointing to the content citing it (the council consideration in Weener and the the eventual covering of the name in the memorial). I didn’t remove the Rheiderland.de source, since it was put there for a reason, even if I can’t verify it now… And regarding the hook, don’t [[User:1brianm7]]’s suggestion of ”’ALT1”’ and revision of the text solve the issue? I have not seen any sources casting doubt on the identification, only those emphasizing its certainty (the NYT goes so far as to say that it’s 99.9% certain). I Also added mention of corroboration with his family’s testimonies to [[User:1brianm7]]’s revision. [[User:TouchedWithFire|TouchedWithFire]] ([[User talk:TouchedWithFire|talk]]) 14:57, 7 December 2025 (UTC)

}}<!–Please do not write below this line or remove this line. Place comments above this line.–>

Jakobus Onnen

The Last Jew in Vinnitsa

ALT1: … that artificial intelligence was used to help identify Jakobus Onnen as the gunman in The Last Jew in Vinnitsa (pictured)?

Converted from a redirect by TouchedWithFire (talk).
Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.

TouchedWithFire (talk) 11:04, 24 October 2025 (UTC).

Policy compliance:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation

Overall: @TouchedWithFire: I read the Guardian article awhile ago, pretty interesting. I also took the liberty of adding the photo to the hook. The sources are all legit, but I can’t say I disagree with the reader who tagged it as possibly incorporating AI generated text. I removed some of the obvious stuff, but it’s still there. Most pressing, the last seven sentences are not currently cited. I’ve also proposed an ALT1 to make the hook less clunky. 1brianm7 (talk) 02:20, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

1brianm7 Please note, I added more sources, it would be appreciated if you could look at the article again. Thank you. TouchedWithFire (talk) 11:25, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

@TouchedWithFire: okay, everything is sourced and the text looks mostly fine, so I’m approving

I think this will have to be pulled. I have serious concerns regarding LLM usage with this article, and further, a read of the German version makes it clear that it is full of factual inaccuracies. It would be embarrassing to let this go to the main page in this state – it needs to be rewritten. MediaKyle (talk) 18:10, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

I’ve removed my approval until this can be resolved. Looking at the German version through Google translate, the only things that stick out are some bad phrasing, redundancy, and a few eh sentences (“reflecting his role as an educated professional within the Nazi academic milieu”). I don’t see any factual inaccuracies. The prose has significant similarities with the German article, so I’m fairly certain parts of it were translated (by the creator or an LLM I don’t know), but it is not attributed as such. Pinging creator @TouchedWithFire: 1brianm7 (talk) 19:11, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

Okay, I’m taking a step back. Yesterday I worked on the article for an hour, added sources, and rewrote a large part of it. I wanted to take part in DYK because it seemed interesting and important to me, I hope I’ll succeed next time. TouchedWithFire (talk) 04:26, 27 October 2025 (UTC)

@TouchedWithFire: I’ve found appearing on DYK to be a fulfilling part of writing an article, I’m sorry that this experience hasn’t been the best for you. If you so desire, I’ll reject this nomination. However, I would recommend against doing so as this can still be accepted until it timeouts in about two months, and you might change your mind. Looking at the article’s content, I don’t see any factual inaccuracies or problem with its biographical content (pinging @MediaKyle: to ask what they saw), just some redundancy and problems with sources not being placed next to text they support. The article is by no means unable to be brought to standard and those problems are not impossible to solve. 1brianm7 (talk) 19:58, 27 October 2025 (UTC)

Thank you so much, I really appreciate your reply. If so, I will follow your advice and would ask that the door remain open. I will work on it soon and try to bring it up to par. TouchedWithFire (talk) 07:22, 30 October 2025 (UTC)

Note that the article states that Onnen is the likely murderer while the hooks portray him as the undisputed murderer. It’s one or the other and this needs to be settled before this can run. Bremps… 16:06, 31 October 2025 (UTC)

Thank you all for the feedback, I rewrote much of the article and I think I addressed all the issues. @1brianm7: If you could, I would appreciate it if you would give it another look. Thank you.

@TouchedWithFire: I’m a little busy right now and I didn’t see this since the ping didn’t work as you forgot to sign, but I’ll try to look it over next week. 1brianm7 (talk) 04:16, 7 November 2025 (UTC)

Pinging nominator and those who have previously raised concerns, feel free to ignore . @TouchedWithFire, MediaKyle, Gdeblois19, Chipmunkdavis, and Bremps: First I’d like to thank all the editors who raised concerns with the article and helped improve it, and TouchedWithFire for not getting disheartened and working on it. The article has undergone significant edits to ensure source text integrity and get it up to standard. I have just done a significant round of copyedits and formatting mostly, but I did not find any factually incorrect claims or issues with source-text integrity. I would like to get a second opinion to make sure I’m calling this right and no debilitating concerns remain before removing the banner. As for the hook issue raised, I think ALT1a: … that historian Jürgen Matthäus used artificial intelligence to help identify Jakobus Onnen as the gunman in The Last Jew in Vinnitsa (pictured)? resolves it. Also, we should probably get a dummy edit to provide attribution to the .de article, but I have no clue on how to do that. 1brianm7 (talk) 19:25, 10 November 2025 (UTC)

It’s been a week. the dummy edit was done 1brianm7 (talk) 02:13, 18 November 2025 (UTC)

Apologies. I only recently learned that it’s necessary to write that the article was translated in the edit summary. In addition to the dummy edit by User:Bremps, I added a “Translated page” template to the talkpage.

When I promoted this, the only underlying issue was, I thought, the failed verification, and I was going to migrate the source somewhere else. However I have pulled it after some issues raised by MediaKyle, mainly the underlying LLM generation (that may still have some hallucinations) and the difference in perspective from the dewiki article which portrays it from a broader point of view (while this article asserts that the gunman is Onnen, the German article isn’t that sure). The article needs more thorough checks of the sources before it can be approved. Pings: TouchedWithFire, Gdeblois19, Chipmunkdavis, Bremps, 1brianm7 HurricaneZeta^C 03:23, 6 December 2025 (UTC)

Regarding the hooks, I removed the caption from the image as it violated WP:DYKIMG. ALT1 or ALT1a are both fine, but the issues above need to be fixed. HurricaneZeta^C 03:30, 6 December 2025 (UTC)

I’ve cleaned up some hallucination and cloppyvio, but I can’t access quite a few of the paywalled German sources. I also have an unusual concern about the hook, in that it is very similar to the Guardian article headline. It varies a bit but not enough that it doesn’t give me pause, other opinions welcome. CMD (talk) 04:41, 6 December 2025 (UTC)

@HurricaneZeta: In my last round of copyediting I tried to make clear that it was Matthaus’ identification. I came to the conclusion that all of MediaKyle’s concerns had been resolved (it looks like there was still a little weird stuff left, so I was slightly wrong, but not major and now corrected). 1brianm7 (talk) 04:25, 7 December 2025 (UTC)

Was anyone able to get access to the rheiderland.de source? I’d like to take a look at it if possible. ARandomName123 (talk)^{Ping me!} 21:35, 6 December 2025 (UTC)

It looks like the paywall is within the text, so regular paywall removals don’t work. I think there isn’t a way to remove it via Inspect Element, so someone with a subscription or trial needs to go in and access it (unless someone else finds a way to get access). HurricaneZeta^C 21:41, 6 December 2025 (UTC)

@TouchedWithFire, 1brianm7, HurricaneZeta, and Chipmunkdavis: Regarding the hook itself, has the identification been confirmed without doubt, or as the German Wikipedia suggests, it’s not a closed case yet?

As for the German sources, I’ll ping Gerda Arendt for help, to see if she might be able to access at least some of the sources here. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 03:42, 7 December 2025 (UTC)

@Narutolovehinata5: It was my understanding that Matthaus has identified him as the shooter with 99% certainty. When I did my last round of copyedits on the article, I intended to make it clear that was his identification and not put it in wikivoice, and I wrote ALT1a to do that. Is it too close to wikivoice (I may have been a been bit careless in not definitely identifying this Nazi as this murderer). 1brianm7 (talk) 04:25, 7 December 2025 (UTC)

Admittedly I have not read the article, but is the conclusion widely accepted by other scholars as well, or not yet? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 04:38, 7 December 2025 (UTC)

@Narutolovehinata5: I’m not sure this is the type of thing with a lot of historical debate. It’s identifying an unidentified person as this random guy, and this random guy was just a Nazi doing Nazi things who did a Nazi thing that was randomly immortalized as an example of Nazi evil. Matthaus is an expert (recently retired head of research at the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum), and he has done extensive research into this photo, previously showing that it was not taken in Vinnitsa (the photos in the background match with buildings elsewhere, so a pretty confident assertion), and he did a bunch of research to get this conclusion. Just looking at a recently published NYT article, Christopher R. Browning and Katja Hoyer both praised the discovery, and I’m sure others have in various German sources. 1brianm7 (talk) 05:01, 7 December 2025 (UTC)

(late to this, pinged) I have no access to the pay-walled sources, but for example what I see of the one regarding the war memorial supports what the article says. We might say 99% in the hook, and we might say that a historian iddentified with the help of AI. —Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:40, 7 December 2025 (UTC)

I read the German article, and it has more detail about the fact that it was a relative of Onnen who was suspicious, and provided the historian with family photos. AI image analysis was used to compare the images. The wording in German is “In 2025, a research team led by the historian Jürgen Matthäus identified him as the suspected shooter …”. In German it’s “mutmaßlicher Schütze” (which Deepl gives first as “alleged shooter”) which is a legal term for someone not (yet) pronounced guilty, and we might do the same, in article and hook, and there may be a different term in English. We should not be afraid of copyvio because it has to be precise. —Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:54, 7 December 2025 (UTC)

@ARandomName123:I recall I was able to access it when I first reviewed the article, but I’ve had no luck in seeing it since then. 1brianm7 (talk) 04:25, 7 December 2025 (UTC)

I too no longer have access to the Rheiderland.de article, but I added additional sources pointing to the content citing it (the council consideration in Weener and the the eventual covering of the name in the memorial). I didn’t remove the Rheiderland.de source, since it was put there for a reason, even if I can’t verify it now… And regarding the hook, don’t User:1brianm7‘s suggestion of ALT1 and revision of the text solve the issue? I have not seen any sources casting doubt on the identification, only those emphasizing its certainty (the NYT goes so far as to say that it’s 99.9% certain). I Also added mention of corroboration with his family’s testimonies to User:1brianm7‘s revision. TouchedWithFire (talk) 14:57, 7 December 2025 (UTC)

Jakobus Onnen

Must Read

Leave a Comment Cancel Reply

Leave a Comment