Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Indiana in the American Civil War

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

not promoted Blnguyen (bananabucket) 03:05, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Indiana in the American Civil War[edit]

I feel this article is easily a future Featured Article, but should go through the A-class review that only WP MILHIST can provide. Let the examination begin.--Bedford ^Pray 02:14, 12 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment

The lead seems a little short, and more importantly, very abrupt. During the American Civil War Indiana played a critical role seems a little biased and without explanation until the next paragraph, which makes reading difficult. I would suggest combining these smaller sections into several larger paragraphs, and expanding on the first sentence of the lead.
Indiana contributed roughly 210,000 soldiers to the Union and millions of dollars to equip and supply them - I think 'approximately' would be better than 'roughly' and a more precise figure for the money expended would be nice. It doesn't have to be exact, but more than just 'millions' - 'over one hundred million' if that is the figure, for example.
The infobox seems to be in an odd place, and seems a bit threadbare - is there no infobox for this type of article that can be used?
The next day two mass meetings where held in the state where the state's position was decided: Indiana would remain in the Union and would immediately contribute men to suppress the rebellion. - A citation is definately needed, and an expansion as well - who decided, and when exactly? Were there any dissenters?
Before the war ended Indiana would contribute a total of 208,367 men (about 15% of the state's total population) to fight in and serve in the war.- The brackets seem a tad unwieldy
The Indiana Regiments Picture needs to be shifted right, its breaking the page in Firefox
Really, one of the main problems I have is the number of small, fragmentary paragraphs which could either be combined into larger paragraphs, or be expanded upon in more detail.
Being across the Ohio River from Louisville, Kentucky, the Indiana cities of Jeffersonville, New Albany, and Port Fulton saw increased activity - Not being an ACW historian, this seems confusing and in need of elaboration. Why the activity?
The prose needs a bit of polishing as well. Take this example - The Sentinel ran anti-war articles like one entitled "Let Them Go In Peace". - This could become The Sentinel ran anti-war articles, with the headline of one such article reading "Let Them Go In Peace". And here: Chaired by Thomas Hendricks, the convention stated that they supported the integrity of the Union and the war effort, but they were opposed to the abolition of slavery.[24] - Surely it should be 'convention members'?
Spelling could do with a work over as well. When the war ended, the state's Democrats where still seething over their treatment during the war - This has a spelling error, as well as weasel words.

All in all, it's an interesting article that could become A-Class, but it needs a good copyedit and expanding the stby-like paragraphs.

Not an expert, but the references seem like they need to be sorted out into 'Notes' and 'References', and 'p.' or 'pp.' added before the page numbers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Skinny87 (talk • contribs) 22:53, 12 July 2008

I fixed some of the problems you saw: those that were easier to rectify. I'll deal with the numerous subsections soon.--Bedford ^Pray 00:39, 13 July 2008 (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.