Talk:Brooks-Baxter War

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Brooks-Baxter War is a former featured article candidate. Please view the links under Article milestones below to see why the nomination failed. For older candidates, please check the archive.
MILHIST This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.

Contents

[edit] older entries

I noticed that there was nothing in the article about the state being forbidden from deficit spending due partially to the conflict, so I added the last paragraph. --206.255.185.237 03:52, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Sorry, but you're incorrect. There has NEVER been a provision in the Arkansas Constitution of 1874 banning deficit spending by the STATE (though Amendment 1 repudiated the Holford Bonds in the 1880's). Although the 1874 Constitution DID try to ban deficit spending by cities and counties, even that was ineffective until Amendment 10 in 1924 expressly banned local deficits. State deficit spending IS banned by law, however, though it was ignored until the first Revenue Stabilization Law was passed in 1945; those laws have effectively ended deficit spending by cutting cash flow to state agencies during budgetary shortfalls. --70.232.40.250 05:32, January 27, 2006 (UTC)

I have added a lot of stuff to this article. I used large portion of a research paper I did on the war for one of my college courses. You can read that paper here. --The_stuart 23:41, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Copyedit

This article, or a portion of it, was copyedited by the League of Copyeditors in February 2007. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.

[edit] GA Review

At the moment, this article has no chance. Below is a list of the more obvious problems. Once these are fixed, bring it back to GA and renominate it, but don't come back without having them done as the article will just fail all over again.

  1. The lead is a mess. Please edit it into two tight paragraphs explaining as simply as possible the context and effects this incident had and indicate whay it is exceptional or notable.
  2. Sources. Here is the biggest problem. Swathes of the article, including whole paragraphs, are unsourced. For a GA, there should be at least one inline citation per paragraph and more on any controversial statements or statistics. This article is not only grossly undercited, but many of the citations are presented in raw URLs which must be changed (see WP:CITE). There are {{Fact}} tags and a clean-up tag at the top.
  3. The text is scattered by weasel words and poor grammar, although there is good use of images and quotes.

Please give this article a thorough copyedit and clean up the sourcing before bringing it back to GA.--Jackyd101 (talk) 14:25, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Sources need improvement

The article relies heavily on only a couple of sources and period journalism; some third-party scholarly sources would be useful for perspective.--Parkwells (talk) 19:52, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] POV

Based on reading even AR Encyclopedia articles, the reliance on Gazette makes this seriously flawed and POV. I've started to rewrite it with additional material and cites, but it needs more work. --Parkwells (talk) 21:10, 16 May 2008 (UTC)