Talk:Heinbach v Heinbach

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Law

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Tgot richie. Peer reviewers: Tiffany Garavaglia, Alwvy4.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 22:16, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Peer Review 10/4

I really enjoy that your article covers the topic of a court case! It provides interesting information that is valuable to the contribution of women in Missouri's history.

In the lead, the first sentence is detailed on the location about where the court case took place, but it provides no details on what the case was over. In the second sentence, however, you do give detail as to what the case was about, but it may be too much information in the lead about the case itself. It may be beneficial to use that information later in the article. For instance, in the lead, you could state, "Heinbach v Heinbach, a court case in the early 1910's, was between Mary Alice "Mollie" Heinbach and Jesse Heinbach to probate the will of Jesse's father and Mollie's husband, Samuel "Sam" Heinbach." This way, the opening sentence is clear and concise. Just a thought!

Another thing is just shortening the language. For example, instead of saying, "This case ended up going to the Supreme Court of Missouri numerous times before it was resolved" you could say, "This case went to the Supreme Court of Missouri (possibly find the exact number of times?) numerous times before it was resolved in (date)." Again, just a thought that makes the language clear and concise! I think that if the language was concise, it would make the article crisp and purely factual.

When you address the two books that Gregg Andrews wrote documenting the case, I would provide more information regarding those books because this would be a great source. (I know you are probably in the process of this and just haven't completed the research, as I am the same way with my article.)

Another thought is to add more information about the Atlas Portland Cement Company because the company is brought up a few times in the article.

Would it be beneficial to have background information on both Mary and Jesse? Was there any struggle with their relationship that may have led to this disagreement over the will? Again, just a thought, but I think that adding background information would be helpful in addressing the two people that the court case is about.

I would also include an "Outcome/Resolution" section so that the readers understand the verdict and outcome of the case. Also having a section about what occurred during the different court cases would also be beneficial.

In the Literature section, you say, "it greatly influenced him" but there is no citation, which leads to this being an opinion. I don't know if the citation just isn't included, or if this is an opinion, then it would need to be changed.

Overall, I think your article has great potential, as I am really interested in knowing the outcome! I am also interested in knowing if there was a feud that occurred. Best of luck editing and I can't wait to see the future outcome! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alwvy4 (talk • contribs) 17:12, 4 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks you for your feedback, I really appreciate it. For the first section I decided to use your suggestion. I felt that it flowed better than what I originally wrote while still getting the same information across. In regards to adding more information, I just got my hands on both the books and another paper (in which they cite their sources) and am currently in the process of reading them and checking out the sources to see what the original texts say. I also agree there should be an "outcome/Resolution" section in addition to a couple other ones once I get that full Information (I don't really want to put a section up with no information yet, but I might just so it's there). And in regards to the "greatly influenced" part, I saw something similar on the Wikipedia page for Gregg Andrews, although it did not have a source either. So I'll probably just go ahead and delete that until I can find a source. Again, thank yo for the feedback, it has been very helpful. Tgot richie (talk) 14:55, 18 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I really like how you gave readers a section about more literature they could read if they wanted to continue their education about the Heinbach verse Heinbach court case. The introduction to the article needs to be a little more concise. It seems like there is a lot of information thrown into the first couple sentences. Break it down a little bit by talking about the case as a whole instead of including in depth details. In the background section, I would explain the family dynamic a little bit. I was confused at first on who exactly Mollie was. You could also explain how his children had abandoned him and Sam’s alcoholism and health issues. Then I would talk about the case in thorough detail. For example: how long the case lasted, why the land was so important, what happened once the children got the land, along with expanding on the attorney’s deal. Tiffany Garavaglia (talk) 23:58, 7 October 2016 (UTC)Tiffany Garavaglia[reply]

I appreciate the feedback. Yeah I agree with you on the intro, so I shortened it to make it a little clearer. I just got my hands on the books, so once I read those I can put in the information you suggested and I will go into more detail so it isn't confusing. Tgot richie (talk) 14:55, 18 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback from Prof. P

Great to see an article here that didn't exist before! This is an especially difficult article because it is about a case instead of a person, so I do see some revisions that do need to be made here. In your lead section, following your note that it went to the Supreme Court, you need to outline *why* this case is important/notable. What about it is important? Was it an example of something rampant that was happening to women when they had to engage with the law? Was it an example of the ways women are used as scapegoats for men/corporations, or an example of a larger movement of events? Draw clear attention to this in the lead section so that it is clear *why* this case meets Wikipedia's notability requirement. The background section needs to be fleshed out here to more clearly outline the relationship between all of these people. Who was Samuel Heinbach? Who was he married to and when? What county did this court case take place in? Can you link to that county? Atlas company? Lots of places to link this article out that need to be expanded. Let's get is stabilized by December 2016! MeganPeiser (talk) 20:48, 14 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]