Talk:History of slavery in Indiana/GA1

GA Review

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

   I have performed a copyedit; there was nothing else than small typos. Also see comments on images.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

   The partial reorganizing of the references is in my eyes an attempt to make it easier accessible, and your way of doing it is not wrong; I just find it cluttering to not put all the book references in one place and the notes in another.

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   There is one major concern I have—this article is entirely about the political situation on slavery. There should at least be one section on the slaves, what the nature of their duties were, their impact on the economy and other social aspects about them. At the moment there is hardly any mention about slaves in the entire article, just politicians who have opinions on the matter. This is of course covered in other articles, so a single section with a {{main}} will by far suffice (slavery was after all similar in Indiana to other states).

    Done

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

   MoS indicates that forcing sizes on images should be avoided unless utterly necessary. If you can find an even better way to display the two bottom images, please do so, but remember text is not allowed to be squeezed between the two.

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   All in all an impressive article. I am placing on hold due to the one matter of coverage; fix that and I will be more than happy to pass. Arsenikk ^(talk) 16:21, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for your review! I will address the image issue and reorganize the references. In regard the comments on broad, I have a good source on the activities of the slaves and I should be able to put something like that together this afternoon. Charles Edward 17:04, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

I've added the section, and it appears you have already adjusted the references. I have also added a paragraph between the two conflicting images, and that should hopefully also resolve that issue. Charles Edward 21:03, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Great; simple and elegant, yet dauntingly accurate. Congratulations with writing a good article, and thank you for your quality contributions to Wikipedia. Arsenikk ^(talk) 10:21, 2 July 2008 (UTC)