Talk:Chicago Race Riot of 1919
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] more at Lynching in the United States
There's quite a bit more on this at Lynching in the United States, including a photo and more detailed discussion of certain aspects of the events.--Bcrowell 16:57, 22 July 2005 (UTC) anyways!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.63.110.194 (talk) 15:40, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Need more context
What is needed is not more about the details of the events, but the context and background. Walter White's article is excellent for that in the sources.--Parkwells (talk) 18:28, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Good article review
I just finished reviewing the article. Here are my comments:
- I think the lead needs the most work. Right now, roughly half of the article is devoted to the background of the riot but the lead doesn't mention any of it. Several facts are mentioned in the lead but nowhere else in the article.
- I think I have addressed this basic concern now.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 22:49, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
- Why is Chicago Race Riot of 1919 in bold on the second picture?
- When you wikilink something on its own page it get bolded instead of creating a circular link.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 06:49, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
- I notice Negroes, Blacks and African American being used in the article. Can just one term be used?
- fixed (except for quotes)--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 04:32, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
- There are several one or two sentence paragraphs in the article. They need to be removed or merged together.
- done.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 04:48, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
- The references are mostly good. I've asked for several citations. Could the ninth reference be formatted?
- citations added and reference reformated.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 15:17, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
- I noticed the Encyclopædia Britannica mentioned the aftereffects of the riot. Could a paragraph be written about the riots significance?
- I added some information form EB.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 05:32, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
- State’s Attorney Hoyne - Who is this?
- He is a regular state's attorney employed by the office of the Illinois Attorney General. He is a non-notable person by 1919 standards although he might be the equivalent of Marcia Clark or Christopher Darden if they had WP back then.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 04:09, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
- Mentioning Daley is very interesting but is the second mention of him needed? It doesn't seem important to understanding the riot.
- I have incorporated the later mention with the ramifications.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 22:48, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
- I don't feel like there is a good timeline of the riot. The background, the cause, and the end result is there but there's nothing about how or why the riot ended in the article. Newspapers articles of the times might have some salvageable information regarding this. The New York Times has some coverage [1] but I'm sure Chicago newspapers would be better.
- I have got most of these articles incorporated.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 04:04, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
- The article feels like there could be more sections. Only divided into two sections of prose seems to few.
- I have reorganized it.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 04:48, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
- I don't want to have the article to be overwhelmed with pictures but I'm guessing there is an abundance of public domain pictures that could be added.
Everything else looks good. I'm going to ask for a second opinion as I'm rather new at good article reviewing. Right now I'm leaning toward failing the article but I'm sure the editors can address my comments ~ Eóin (talk) 22:24, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
-
- I haven't given the article a careful review, but I think that most of your comments were spot-on. Luckily, Tony is a very responsive editor who addresses issues raised in GA reviews, as we can see from the comments above.
- There's still remaining issues to fix. The interchangable use of the terms Negroes, Blacks and African Americans is jarring - I suggest standardizing. The prose could use sharpening; for example, minimize use of the passive voice.
- Eóin, you may find it useful to show that you've addressed each of the GA criteria. Cheers, Majoreditor (talk) 03:19, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Photos
You found some powerful photos and made excellent additions to the article.--Parkwells (talk) 18:32, 18 May 2008 (UTC)