Jump to content

Talk:Iowa Cow War

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Former featured article candidateIowa Cow War is a former featured article candidate. Please view the links under Article milestones below to see why the nomination was archived. For older candidates, please check the archive.
Good articleIowa Cow War has been listed as one of the Agriculture, food and drink good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
October 22, 2022Good article nomineeListed
July 11, 2024Featured article candidateNot promoted
Did You Know
A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on November 2, 2022.
The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that the Iowa Cow War started due to bovine tuberculosis testing?
Current status: Former featured article candidate, current good article

War?

[edit]

Just because it was violent doesn't make it a war per se. --SomeDudeWithAUserName (talk with me!) 04:03, 19 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I know this comment is very old, but it's called the Iowa Cow War because of reliable sources. SL93 (talk) 02:23, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

[edit]
This review is transcluded from Talk:Iowa Cow War/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: An anonymous username, not my real name (talk · contribs) 17:27, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I think I can handle this review. An anonymous username, not my real name (talk) 17:27, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It's definitely very thorough for such a niche topic, and mostly within the GA criteria, however I think there ars e a few things it could use (in order of importance):

  • Some kind of image(s). Obviously, photos of the actual event aren't exactly plentiful, but pictures of something relevant (e.g. bovine tuberculosis or Norman G. Baker) would help illustrate the page.
  • The fact that the compensation for the cows being slaughtered was less than their market value isn't mentioned in the article, which seems to be the main reason the protests started.
  • An infobox is always helpful for any page.
  • You might want to link Iowa National Guard. However, given the state the article is in, I could see why you wouldn't.

All in all, quite good, with excellent prose. Once these things are addressed, I will happily list it as a GA. An anonymous username, not my real name (talk) 17:45, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An anonymous username, not my real name Thanks for the review. I think that I took care of those issues. SL93 (talk) 18:25, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Perfect. You did an excellent job on this article. An anonymous username, not my real name (talk) 18:34, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Did you know nomination

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by LordPeterII (talk21:03, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Improved to Good Article status by SL93 (talk). Self-nominated at 18:51, 22 October 2022 (UTC).[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
QPQ: Done.

Overall: @SL93: Good article! I need citations for the hook before I proceed though. Onegreatjoke (talk) 20:27, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Onegreatjoke What do you mean? It is cited in the article. A citation being added to the DYK nomination page has never been a requirement. SL93 (talk) 20:32, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
SL93 I know, I just prefer having the citation be in the nomination template since it's easier than just scavenging the article. I will still approve since I verified this in the source. Onegreatjoke (talk) 20:40, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Onegreatjoke I don't include it because the reviewer needs to review the entire article and its sources anyway. Thanks for approving it. SL93 (talk) 20:42, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
To Prep 6