Talk:Venezuelan crisis of 1895/GA1

GA Review[edit]

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Lord Roem (talk) 05:21, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I look forward to reviewing this article -- Lord Roem (talk) 05:21, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Section by section review[edit]

Images

Its just a stylistic choice, but maybe the article would look a little better if the images were not all on one side of the page.
~~Fix the image of the House resolution so its a bit more readable. Maybe just use the first page to enlarge it.~~

Lead

Well done, no problems here.

Background *The statement about gold prospectors should be removed unless more context is provided.

Add a bit more history of the Monroe Doctrine up to this point. After this section (taking the article primae faciae, disregarding my knowledge of the Doctrine), a reader is left asking to what extent was the doctrine enforced in the late 1800s?

Crisis

You must have a cite for the vote in Congress being unanimous. Usually if these tags remain in the article, it qualifies to quick-fail the article, but I am sure here you can find a source for this.

Need a cite for "Gresham thought the demands harsh"

As to the letter being 12000 words - what is the point of that? Was it an agressive letter?

Arbitration

Last sentence in the first paragraph is a bit confusing. Clarify.

Change 'total reached 23 volumes' to 'and the total reaching 23 volumes of evidence and testimony' or something to that effect.

Outcome

Include some critical analysis, if any, of the decision to provide more context.

Aftermath

There is nothing here about the immediate aftermath. Just stuff in the 1940s. While you need to keep that, also include the reactions of all sides to the decision of the Arbitrators.

Concluding Thoughts

Good article, but needs some changes and additions. If these are completed within 7 days, I will go through the checklist for promotion. If not, then this will fail review. Best regards, Lord Roem (talk) 19:37, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

thanks for that. One quick fix I've done is to crop the HR252 image; unfortunately I struggled quite a bit with the placement of the images and couldn't do any better than how it is now (all right-aligned), which isn't ideal. Alternatives just look worse - to me, anyway. I hope I'll have time to deal with the other issues, but RL constraints may not permit (and the passage of time since I was immersed in this material doesn't help any...). Thanks again. Rd232 ^talk 22:30, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I understand your situation. The timeframe can certainly be extended provided you are working in good faith to improve the article, which I believe you are. If you can't fix the image thing, that's cool - just a personal opinion and not a requirement. Cheers, Lord Roem (talk) 23:00, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

OK, clarified the gold issue and clarified/cited the points raised re Crisis; and dropped the Arbitration sentence (can't source it now) and tweaked the "23 volumes" bit. Rd232 ^talk 23:10, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You can just <s></s> (strikethrough) the issues you have resolved, on the list I wrote above. This will make it a bit easier to follow. -- Lord Roem (talk) 00:41, 19 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thanks. Rd232 ^talk 01:03, 19 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like you're about done...yes? - Lord Roem (talk) 01:57, 19 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I've been through it again, made a couple of additions and tweaks. If you could just take a quick look at those, I think we're about done. Rd232 ^talk 18:57, 19 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Looks all good. I'm moving to pass and promote the article. Great job! Cheers, Lord Roem (talk) 20:04, 19 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks for your valuable input. Rd232 ^talk 20:25, 19 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]