Talk:Black Hawk War/GA1
GA Review[edit]
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewing[edit]
Primary problem: The article does not comply with WP:LEAD. The lead needs a serious expansion, to pass as a GA it must include all the relevant information of the article's body, not just a definition of the topic as it does now. Please expand the lead to mirror the article's content in summary form.
1. Prose: overall fine from this non-native speakers view point. Now that the lead is fixed i don't see other MOS related problems.
2. It seems adequately sourced, using good realible sources.
3. I have some issues with the scope. I think the background section doesn't provide sufficient understanding for a reader who is not familiar with US politics towards Native Americans in the early 19th century. I think it would be relevant to include mention of Andrew Jackson's policies of Indian Removal(characterized by some as ethnic cleansing) and that it was these policies that prompted the purchase of the Sauk, Fox and Kickapoo lands. It could also mention the beliefs of the later Thomas Jefferson that NAtive Americans should relocate to west of the mississippi and maintain a societ separate form the US. Also perhaps a mention of the notions of Manifest Destiny (the first notions of which emerged after the war of 1812 and which was considerably fuelled by the Black Hawk War) as a general ideological background for the displacement of native americans might give the reader a better understanding of the circumstances surrounding the events. I think this could be expanded on both in the Background and aftermath sections.
4. The article is generally neutral, but adding the information mentioned above would contribute to providing a slightly more critical view on the policies of indian removal and I think this would benefit the article. I think probably the aftermath section should also somehow contain the consequences of the Black Hawk War for the native groups involved and for the general situation of the American indian in the latter part of the 19th century. Also an idea might be adding a legacy section which could include modern views of the importance of the Black Hawk War, mention memorial sites etc.
5. stability does not seem to be a problem.
6. It is well illustrated.
·Maunus·ƛ· 18:16, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
- That is very close to what I was talking about. A few small tweaks: You write that "few native americans benefited from the war" who were they and how? Possibly it would be more accurate to say that "the war affected adversely even those native americans who had cooperated with the US government". Or "Native americans were adversely affected by the war". The legacy section is very short - maybe it cannot be much longer and I guess that's ok then. The sentence about atrocities seems misplaced - maybe it would go better somewhere else in the text?·Maunus·ƛ· 02:49, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
- Moved the atrocities, maybe you can find a better place still. Did the ce for "affected". I'm not finding much on long term legacy--could you help there? — Rlevse • Talk • 10:16, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
- Probably there isn't any. I am going to pass the article now.·Maunus·ƛ· 13:13, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
- Moved the atrocities, maybe you can find a better place still. Did the ce for "affected". I'm not finding much on long term legacy--could you help there? — Rlevse • Talk • 10:16, 12 August 2009 (UTC)