Talk:Federalist No. 24/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: AryKun (talk · contribs) 19:53, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikisource link to infobox.
"already did not exist under the law of the time" But they did exist in 2 state constitutions, so this statement shouldn't be so all-encompassing.
"peacetime. He says that it is merely an assertion that lacks an argument behind it." to "peacetime, calling it a mere assertion without strong justifications."
The summary should also include the reasons Hamilton prefers professional soldiers to militiamen and his discussion on the necessity of a navy and garrisons protecting it.
"had such a provision regarding standing armies" Unclear what this is referring to, just say "had a prohibition on raising a standing army" or similar instead.
"complacence in that" to "complacence because"?
"advocated garrisons in the western frontier and along the eastern coast" to "advocated for the establishment of garrisons along the western frontier and eastern coast"
Sources seem reliable and are properly formatted; will perform spot-checks later.
- Spot-checks: All sources checked verified the claims made.
- "Federalist Essays in Historic Newspapers". Library of Congress.
- "Federalist Papers: Primary Documents in American History". Library of Congress.
- Scott, Kyle (2013). The Federalist Papers: A Reader's Guide.
- Epstein, David F. (2007). The Political Theory of The Federalist.
Nice work overall. AryKun (talk) 15:13, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Good Article review progress box

Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV ()

3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant ()

Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed