Talk:Great French Wine Blight

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Great French Wine Blight article.

Article policies
Good article Great French Wine Blight has been listed as one of the History good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can delist it, or ask for a reassessment.
An entry from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know? column on November 7, 2007.
November 27, 2007 Good article nominee Listed
Wine WikiProject Great French Wine Blight is part of WikiProject Wine, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of wines, grapes, wine producers and wine growing regions. Please work to improve this article, or visit our project page where you can join the project and find other ways of helping.
Good article GA This article has been rated as GA-Class on the assessment scale.
High This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale within WikiProject Wine.
Great French Wine Blight is within the scope of WikiProject France, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to France on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please join the project and help with our open tasks.
Good article GA This article has been rated as GA-Class on the Project's quality scale. See comments

[edit] Inconsistancy?

The article states:

  • "Over 40% of French grape vines and vineyards were devastated over a 15 year period, from the late 1850s to the mid 1870s."
  • "Production of wine in France fell from 84.5 million hectolitres in 1875 to only 23.4 million hectolitres."

I assume that the last statement should be "Production of wine in France fell from 84.5 million hectolitres to only 23.4 million hectolitres in 1875." to make more sense, but I'm not sure, also the 40% and 84.5 to 23.4 sounds a bit wrong, but might be correct with a from and to year, also a ref would be nice. --Stefan talk 14:09, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] GAN review: On hold

I have reviewed this article according to the requirements of the GA criteria and have placed the article on hold at this time until the following issues are addressed:

  1. ""Reconstitution" (as it was termed) of the many vineyards that had been lost was a slow process, but eventually the wine industry in France was able to return to relative normality." Single sentences shouldn't stand alone, either expand on this or incorporate it into another paragraph. Fix all other occurrences within the article.
    Well, I fixed that instance. Y Done (that one, at least)
  2. "The only description of the disease that was given by these wine growers was that it 'reminded them distressingly of "consumption"'." Add an inline citation for where this quote is from.
    Y Done -- Anonymous DissidentTalk 06:42, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
  3. The "Damage" section needs sources for the stats.
    All from one source, sourced. Y Done -- Anonymous DissidentTalk 06:44, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
  4. The present day section needs to be expanded further, and possibly consider putting the short sentences together in one paragraph.
    Well, I have "de-expanded", which, ironically, still has the desired fact - removing the openendedness of the section. I can't add more, I have no sources, particularly as to the vaguely termed "lasting effects". This really may be waffle on the part of my source, because its not expanded on at all. -- Anonymous DissidentTalk 06:49, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
  5. See if there are any external links that can be added to the article for readers to pursue more information on the subject.
    None specifically relative to the blight. Of course, I could overhall a ton of French vineyard URLs and add them, but I don't think it would add much to the article on the blight. -- Anonymous DissidentTalk 06:51, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

The article looks fine besides these above problems, and they shouldn't take too long to fix. I will leave the article on hold for seven days, and if the issues are not addressed the article will be failed. If you have any questions let me know on my talk page and I'll get back to you as soon as I can. Also, I'm going on a wikibreak until Sunday, so there may be a delay before I look over the corrections/pass the article. --Nehrams2020 (talk) 00:32, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] GA passed

Since the above issues were addressed, I have passed this article as a good article according to the requirements of the GA criteria. Continue to improve the article, making sure that all new information is properly sourced. Also, to anyone that is reading this review, please consider reviewing an article or two at WP:GAN to help with the large backlog. Instructions can be found here. Keep up the good work, and I hope that you continue to bring articles up to Good Article status. If you have any further questions about this review, let me know on my talk page and I'll get back to you as soon as I can. I have updated the article history to reflect this review. Happy editing! --Nehrams2020 (talk) 00:23, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks Nehrams. -- Anonymous DissidentTalk 06:26, 29 November 2007 (UTC)