Talk:The Drunkard's Progress/GA1

GA Review

Passed. Generalissima (talk) 19:26, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

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

Reviewer: Generalissima (talk · contribs) 18:49, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ah heck, I'll do this over the next few days hopefully! Great work, this was one I was curious about making at one point but couldn't find sources. Generalissima (talk)

Criterion #1: Well-written

I don't see any prose problems, good job! It's clear prose, and I don't see any MoS violations.

Criterion #2: Verifiable

Let me check a few citations here.

Le Beau 2007, pp. 21–25
- Pretty wide-swathe of pages here, but yeah, checks out the claim that Currier and Ives were a very large lithograph firm.
Mills 1996, p. 12
- Yep! This talks about John Warner Barber's Drunkards Progress. I would note the use of biblical verses (as described in Mills) here since it ties together the Temperance movement to period Christian revivalism (quite important for understanding its emergence).
Brown 1975, p. 237
- Checks out okay!

Criterion #3: Broad in its coverage

The rest is okay, but I feel the background section is a little lacking. I think it'd be a good idea to give just a couple sentences more about what the Temperance movement is and what it sought to do; it's really hard to understand this piece without a decent grasp of Temperance being initially a Christian revivalist thing seeing alcohol consumption as a disease and sin.

Criterion #4: Neutral

Yep! Good job so far.

Criterion #5: Stable

As far as I can tell.

Criterion #6: Illustrated

Image licenses check out, all being public domain.

Overall:

@Guerillero: Just needs a tiny bit of work in the background section. Really good job so far! Generalissima (talk) 17:29, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dcdiehardfan kindly provided the extra context while I was sleeping. I am going to replace the PBS website with a scholarly source, double check the source-text integrity, add page numbers for the Masters and Young (2022) citation, and make the citation consistent with the others per CITEVAR. -- In actu (Guerillero) ^{Parlez Moi} 08:15, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rad, the new background section looks good. I'm confident this now meets the GA criteria. Generalissima (talk) 19:25, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.