Jump to content

Talk:Revolt of the Lash

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleRevolt of the Lash has been listed as one of the Warfare 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
December 25, 2016Good article nomineeListed
Did You Know
A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on November 19, 2016.
The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that after the mutineer sailors involved in the Revolt of the Lash were granted amnesty, many were discharged from the Brazilian Navy, put in prison, or sent to work on rubber plantations?
On this day...Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on November 21, 2010, November 21, 2011, November 22, 2014, November 22, 2016, November 22, 2017, and November 22, 2019.

Sources

[edit]

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Nick-D (talk · contribs) 01:10, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Comments

[edit]

I'll post a review of this interesting-looking article over the next few days. Nick-D (talk) 01:10, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This article is in excellent shape. I have the following comments:

  • Is note 'B' necessary?
    • I think it is; there were a few details that I left out, as that level of nuance didn't seem appropriate for the lead. Am happy to reconsider if you think it's a bad idea.
  • "These officers were fond of inflicting corporal punishment" - is "fond" the right word here? It makes it sound like the officers enjoyed this. "Frequently inflicted" perhaps?
    • Fixed.
  • "forty-five percent of its authorized personnel (in 1896) " - this is then repeated in the same para
    • Fixed.
  • Can more be said about what the planning ahead of the mutiny involved? - it's stated that the mutiny was planned well in advance, but not much further detail is currently provided
  • Do any of the sources discuss how the skills of the crews of the ships improved, and what this meant for the individuals' self-respect and attitudes? There seems to be a story here about the modernisation of the navy leading to the transformation of the crew from a lowly-skilled labouring underclass into what were essentially skilled workers which could be more fully fleshed out.
    • I strongly suspect that info is in A marinha brasileira na era dos encouraçados, 1895–1910, as 'technological advances without accompanying social change' is basically Martins' thesis in six words. However, I don't speak Portuguese (the info in this article was related by a Brazilian editor), so for now, I won't be able to act on this.
  • On that topic, as a suggestion for the further development of the article, it might be worth looking through the literature on labour relations for material on this topic.
  • "A significant percentage" - could you say "around half" given the numbers discussed in note G? I'd also suggest bringing the content of this note into the body of the article given its importance.
    • Added the 1,500–2,000 out of 4,000 figure.
  • "Unfortunately" - seems like editorialising, and isn't necessary
    • Good call, I meant to say "unfortunately for the government" or something similar, but I've just removed it.
  • File:Rui barbosa.jpg probably needs to be tagged with {{FoP-Nederland}} or similar
    • Done!
  • File:JCandido.JPG needs to be tagged with {{FoP-Brazil}}
    • Done as well.
  • Could the process by which the Navy was re-manned be discussed? Did the new sailors enjoy the improved conditions the mutineers had won, or were these pulled back? Nick-D (talk) 05:05, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment

[edit]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

  1. Is it well written?
    A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
    B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
  2. Is it verifiable with no original research?
    A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:
    B. All in-line citations are from reliable sources, including those for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines:
    C. It contains no original research:
    D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:
    B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
  4. Is it neutral?
    It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
  5. Is it stable?
    It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
  6. Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
    A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
    B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail: