Talk:Plum River raid

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Good article Plum River raid has been listed as one of the History good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can delist it, or ask for a reassessment.
An entry from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know? column on August 20, 2007.
October 19, 2007 Good article nominee Listed
This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:

[edit] GA Review

Congratulations. This article has, in my view, fulfilled all the requirements to be named a Good Article. There are several areas in which it could be improved, however.

  • A picture would really help the understanding of the article, but owing to the obscurity of the subject, it may be difficult to obtain an appropriate image. I'd suggest an image of one or more individuals involved in the event, a blockhouse typical of the type at Plum River, or one of the Native American tribes that participated in the attack.
  • A map would be appropriate, particularly for the infobox header, as most readers will not be familiar with the location of Plum River.
  • I believe it should be Plum River Raid with a capital R, as it refers to a unique, single event. I would strongly suggest moving the article to the appropriate page and changing the name within the article as well.

JKBrooks85 01:18, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the review, I have been a bit inactive of late, sorry for the late response. Our map is currently being worked on, as this article is part of a multi-user collaboration. You can see some rough drafts if you scroll around in this section of our collaboration talk page. The images are a good suggestion, I will get crackin' on this one right away. As for the name, I believe the title follows current Wikipedia naming conventions, for instance, Virginia Tech massacre or better yet, Rock Springs massacre. If I am not correct on this I would happily change it. IvoShandor 07:44, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
Good stuff. Glad to see I wasn't too far off base with my critique, and even better that you saw it in advance. The naming is a minor thing... this works just as well as a capitalized version, but it was just something that came to mind when I read it. Keep up the great work! JKBrooks85 15:19, 22 October 2007 (UTC)