Talk:Conclusion of the American Civil War/GA1

GA Review

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

Initial Comment

I will be reviewing this article in the next day or two. Regards, MarquisCostello (talk) 21:44, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

An overview:

well written =?
accuracy =Y
thorough =Y
NPOV =?
stable =Y
images =?

Some specific comments:

Lead

I think the first paragraph could be split into two sentences to make it a little easier to read.
'seemed to dominate the reporting of the battles of the Western Theater'

Is this saying that the Eastern Theater battles were reported more than the Western ones? I think this needs some clarification.

'Grant then was willing to launch an attack on a wide front when'

What action/event/factor made Grant willing? Because this isn't that clear.

'The last Confederate surrender happened on November 6, 1865, with the CSS Shenandoah being turned in, finally concluding the American Civil War.'

It might be beneficial to say what the CSS Shenandoah is.

I would add one comment about the lead. The third paragraph should describe the events, not what the article is going to say about the events. This isn't a book jacket blurb. So "The timeline shows the surrender of the Army of Northern Virginia on April 9 around noon and the surrender of Gen. St. John Richardson Liddell's troops some 6 hours later." should be "The Army of Northern Virginia surrendered on April 9 around noon and Gen. St. John Richardson Liddell's troops surrendered some 6 hours later." This applies to the whole paragraph. Hal Jespersen (talk) 00:36, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Done Done (I think I got it all). cmadler (talk) 14:00, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Split first paragraph into two sentences.
Explained further the reporting of the Eastern Treater battles.
Explained further why Grant was willing to launch attacks on a wide front.
Explained what the CSS Shenandoah was.

Done --Doug Coldwell ^talk 14:02, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The two sentences about Cherokees toward the end of the lead need some work. I'd fix them, but I'm not even sure what's being said there! cmadler (talk) 17:03, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Done Perhaps this recent edit makes it clearer of what I am trying to say. If it needs further explaining, let me know. --Doug Coldwell ^talk 19:56, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Surrender of Gen. St. John Richardson Liddell's troops (April 9)

'The Confederates lost Spanish Fort in Alabama at the Battle of Spanish Fort'

I'd make this '...lost the city of Spanish Fort' to ensure that the reader doesn't think that a Spanish fort was lost.

'This is considered to be the last major combined-force battle of the American Civil War.'

Do you have a citation for this?

Made it the city of Spanish Fort.
Explained further of the last major battle of ACW with citation.

Done --Doug Coldwell ^talk 14:02, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Disbanding of Mosby's Raiders (April 21)

'who opposed the Union control of the Loudoun Valley area.'

This needs a citation.

The reading aloud of the letter to his men needs a citation i think.

Explained further who opposed the Union control.
Citation provided of the reading aloud of letter.

Done --Doug Coldwell ^talk 14:02, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Surrender of Gen. Joseph E. Johnston and his various armies (April 26)

How does the Army of Tennessee fit in here? If this was an army under Johnston's command, i think this needs to be said.
'This coupled with Lincoln's assassination induced Johnston to act'

You need a comma after 'this'.

'These included: that the warring states be immediately recognized after their leaders signed loyalty oaths, that property as well as personal rights be returned to the Confederates, the re-establishing the Federal court system, and that a general amnesty would be given. On April 24 the authorities in Washington rejected Sherman's proposed terms, and two days later Johnston agreed to the same terms Lee got back on April 9.'

In the list of terms, each one should be separated by a semi-colon rather than a comma. Also, in the last part, i don't think you need the word 'back' in 'Lee got back on April 9. It might also be better to use an expression like 'was presented with' rather than 'got'.

'Johnston's forces that were surrendered combined for a total of around 30,000 men.'

This would be better as 'Johnston's forces that were surrendered totalled around 30,000 men.'

Done Dealt with the issues for this section (April 26). Please let me know if anything more is required. Kresock (talk) 00:27, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Surrender of the Confederate departments of Alabama, Mississippi and East Louisiana regiments (May 4)

The first paragraph needs some more citations [e.g. for the troop numbers and the fall of Mobile, Alabama].

Done Dealt with the issues for this section. --Doug Coldwell ^talk 17:30, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Surrender of the Confederate District of the Gulf (May 5)

'He wanted to join the remains of the Army of Tennessee in North Carolina, however hearing of Johnston's surrender to Sherman on April 26...'

I would make this 'He wanted to join the remains of the Army of Tennessee in North Carolina. However, hearing of Johnston's surrender to Sherman on April 26...'

Done Dealt with the issues for this section. --Doug Coldwell ^talk 22:08, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Surrender of the Confederate Department of Florida and South Georgia (May 10)

'Pritchard's troops were to scout through the country'

Make this 'Pritchard's troops scouted through the country'

'In 1864, Maj. Gen. Samuel Jones had commanded the Departments of Florida, South Carolina, and South Georgia, with his headquarters in Pensacola, Florida. His primary orders were to guard the coastal areas of these states and to destroy Union gunboats. He was also to destroy all machinery and sawmills that would be beneficial to the Union armies.'

Change this to 'In 1864, Maj. Gen. Samuel Jones commanded the Departments of Florida, South Carolina, and South Georgia, with his headquarters in Pensacola, Florida. His primary orders were to guard the coastal areas of these states and to destroy Union gunboats. He also destroyed all the machinery and sawmills that would be beneficial to the Union armies.

Is there such a verb to 'headquarter'?

Made this Pritchard's troops scouted through the country...
Changed this to 'In 1864, Maj. Gen. Samuel Jones...........
Would make the correction, however don't understand what to do.

Done Dealt with the issues for this section. --Doug Coldwell ^talk 22:08, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Surrender of Thompson's Brigade (May 11)

'(county seat of Cross County from 1868 through 1886)'

Add a 'the' at the start of the bracket.

'These two officers met then on May 9 to negotiate a surrender.'

Remove the 'then'.

added "the"
removed "then"

Done Dealt with the issues for this section. --Doug Coldwell ^talk 22:08, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Surrender of Confederate forces of North Georgia (May 12)

'There were several letters between the various generals involved in the negotiations of this surrender'

'negotiation' rather than 'negotiations' would work better.

'According to a letter dated May 4, 1865, by Col. Louis Merrill to the Headquarters Department of the Cumberland in Nashville, Tennessee, keeping them informed, "on paper" there were about 10,000 soldiers under Wofford's command, which consisted of all the Confederate troops in Northwestern Georgia, however only about a third could actually be collected as the rest were deserters.'

This sentence has too many commas. It needs to be broken down into two sentences or shortened.

replaced with "negotiation"
Broke down to shorter sentences.

Done Dealt with the issues for this section. --Doug Coldwell ^talk 22:08, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Disbandment after the Battle at Palmito Ranch (May 13)

'In January or February a Maj. Gen. Lew Wallace was sent by the Union government to Texas.'

Remove the 'a'.

Done Kresock (talk) 02:48, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Surrender of Cherokee chief Stand Watie

'This was the last significant Confederate active forces.'

Should this just be 'force' rather than 'forces'?

In this paragraph i think there is too much information on Stand Watie's previous endeavours. I would slim it down just to mention briefly his past exploits but to concentrate on the immediate events leading up to his surrender.

Changed to "force."
Slimmed down the section and concentrated on the immediate events that lead up to his surrender.

Done Dealt with the issues for this section. --Doug Coldwell ^talk 13:40, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Surrender of Kirby Smith (May 26)

'Gen. Smith surrendered his troops which by then was the only significant Confederate forces'

Should this just be 'force' rather than 'forces'? Or if not, then the 'was' must become a 'were'.

'that surrendered May 26'

Add an 'on' after 'surrendered'.

Done both. Kresock (talk) 02:55, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Surrender of CSS Shenandoah (November 6)

The C.S.S. Shenandoah, was commissioned'

You don't need a comma here.

'Then sailing west and north into the South Pacific the Shenandoah was in Micronesia at the Island of Ponape (called Ascension Island by Whittle) when the American Civil War came to terms with the surrender of Lee's Army of Northern Virginia to the Union forces in April 1865.'

Make this sentence into the format 'The Shenandoah then sailed west and north into....'

'She then traveled north crossing the Arctic Circle on June 19.[37] Continuing then south along the coast of Alaska they came upon a fleet of Union ships whaling on June 22'

She (a singular) suddenly becomes a plural (they). This needs to be rectified.

'They eventually got word on August 2 from an English barque, Bark Barracouta, from San Francisco bound for Liverpool'

This bit needs restructuring, as it doesn't make sense or read well. It needs to be something like '...from an English barque, Bark Barracoutra, in the process of sailing from San Fransisco to Liverpool'

'He knew that they were now being hunted as pirates, so as they traveled south off the coast of South America they stayed far away from any mainland and went into the South Pacific. They knew pirates could be hanged.'

Make this something like 'He knew that they were now being hunted as pirates and that pirates could be hanged, and so as they traveled south off the coast...'.

'Waddell immediately then converted the warship back to a merchant ship, as it was known previously as the Sea King.'

This doesn't make sense. May i suggest: 'Waddell immediately then converted the warship back to a merchant ship (it was known previously as the Sea King).

'letter to the Earl Russell of England.'

Change this to 'letter to the English Earl of Russell'. I think this reads a little better.

removed comma
Changed wording as recommended
Corrected to wording of "she" only.
Changed wording as recommended
Changed wording as recommended
Changed wording as recommended
Changed wording as recommended

Done Dealt with the issues for this section. --Doug Coldwell ^talk 13:40, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

General Comments

In many of the paragraphs there is only one citation at the end of each paragraph. Are these citations for the entire paragraph or just for the sentence at the end of them? If its the latter then these paragraphs need more citations.

The one citation at the end of the paragraph is meant to be generally for the entire paragraph.

Done --Doug Coldwell ^talk 13:40, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have found quite a few grammatical errors etc., so it would be wise for you to read through again and make any changes i may have missed.

Yes, and also having others work on the article for additional eyes to improve these grammatical errors. There are at least a half a dozen additional editiors working on the article to bring it up to GA status.

Done --Doug Coldwell ^talk 13:40, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Several of your citations refer to primary sources listed at the end of the article. Reference to these may break WP:NOR (No Original Research). To quote from the NOR policy: 'Any interpretation of primary source material requires a reliable secondary source for that interpretation.' You appear to use them merely for dates- as a check, are these facts stated explicitly without need for any interpretation? If so, i think this should be okay.

Yes, using the primary sources for dates. Any primary source references are facts stated explicitly without need for any interpretation. Otherwise any primary source reference is also backed up with a secondary source reference.

Done --Doug Coldwell ^talk 13:40, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to congratulate you on the extensive further reading provided.

Thank you.

Done --Doug Coldwell ^talk 13:40, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You also use 2 different date formats- May 4 and May 4th. This needs to be standardised.

Corrected throughout the article

Done Think I got them all. Kresock (talk) 00:48, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The two images of markers would benefit from captions.

Done --Doug Coldwell ^talk 16:05, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think that is everything. I have put the article on hold and will give you some time to address these issues. If you could strike-through or checkmark points you have tackled this would allow progress to be monitored easily. If you have any queries or comments then please leave me a message here, or on your talk page [where i have initially made a comment]. Thanks, MarquisCostello (talk) 23:58, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Done Everything Done. One question: Don't understand under May 10 that pertaining to " verb to headquater." It could be it was fixed by others, so that is why I don't get it now. If I missed anything, or if you find anything additional, please let me know and I will fix it.--Doug Coldwell ^talk 13:40, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Question about Stand Watie and the Battle of Palmito Ranch. The article on the battle says that it was the last major battle of the ACW. The Stand Watie article says that the last battle was the Battle of Doaksville, at which he surrendered. I don't have any sources on this, so I'm not going to change things, but someone with sources for it needs to double-check this. Thx, cmadler (talk) 15:00, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Done Don't know about the "...Battle of Doaksville, at which he surrendered.", however I do have references he surrendered at Doaksville on June 23, 1865. Watie rode into town and laid down his arms on June 23. The references speaks nothing of any "Battle of Doaksville."--Doug Coldwell ^talk 15:42, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Additional Comments

A few more things:

On the headquarter issue, i have just never heard of anything being 'headquartered' before. But i suspect it may be a military term or something.

See Headquarters#Military headquarters IF I am understanding your concern. Rephrase question, if this is not the answer.

Done --Doug Coldwell ^talk 16:17, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In the lead, there is this extract: "His troops ultimately became exhausted defending this extended stretch because they were stretched too thin. Grant then took advantage of the situation and launched attacks on this wide front of poorly defended thirty miles." Can you find another word for stretch? And the second sentence needs some rewording, as "this wide front of poorly defended thirty miles" doesn't read well. May i suggest "launched attacks on this thirty mile and poorly defended front."

Reworded as ...became exhausted defending this line because they were thinned out too much. AND reworded second line as suggested.

Done --Doug Coldwell ^talk 16:17, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

An extract from the second April 9th section: "This is considered to be the last major battle of large numbers of United States Colored Troops (USCT) of the American Civil War." 'Of' is used three times here. I suggest a change to "...last major battle of the American Civil War involving large numbers of United States Colored Troops."

Reworded as suggested

Done --Doug Coldwell ^talk 16:17, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In the May 13 section: "The battle was lost by Barrett's Union regiments mainly because the Confederates outnumbered them five to one. In addition the Confederates cavalry had artillery as well as infantry, while the Union consisted only of foot soldiers." This should be "while the Union army consisted only..."

Fixed army

Done --Doug Coldwell ^talk 16:17, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In the surrender of Watie section: "Yearly, Federal troops all over the western United States hunted down Watie, but to no avail as they never captured him." I would replace with "hunted down" with "hunted for" and delete "to no avail as".

Replaced with suggested wording

Done --Doug Coldwell ^talk 16:17, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Let me know when you're done! Regards, MarquisCostello (talk) 15:05, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Done If you find anything else, please let me know. I believe I corrected these last ones as you suggested. This is great that you are able to find these corrections that needed to be done. It improves the article considerably. --Doug Coldwell ^talk 16:17, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Final Comment

Okay, i have had another look through and everything appears to be excellent now. Will pass for GA status. Thanks to the various editors who worked on making the improvements! MarquisCostello (talk) 16:24, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]