Talk:Wistarburg Glass Works/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Eric Corbett (talk · contribs) 12:38, 28 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.
2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).
	2c. it contains no original research.
	2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
	7. Overall assessment.

Detailed comments

To follow over the next few days. Eric Corbett 12:38, 28 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Lead

The three-sentence lead doesn't even begin to adequately summarise the article, and should be expanded to draw out the article's major salient points. It probably needs to be about four times its current length to do an adequate job.
Because Casper Wistar isn't mentioned in the lead it comes as something of a surprise to see his name at the beginning of the Background section.
The explanation for the demise of the company given on the road sign in the lead doesn't match what the article says in the History section. Had the company been trading unprofitably since the outbreak of the Revolutionary War, given that it lasted for six years after the war began? What effect did the war have on the factory's operations? It's hard to believe that it had none.
The lead refers to the United States, but there was no United States when the factory started.

Background

I'm not particulary keen on this title, as the section's not really about background at all; rather, it's about setting up the glass works. What about something like Company foundation? A background section should explain why there was a market for home-produced glass in the Colonies, and how Wistar thought he could exploit it. After all, presumably he didn't set up the company as a hobby?
"He then recruited experienced professional European glass artisans to make the factory operational, brokering for the workers with European agents ... Wistar had homes built near the factory for additional workers". This stuff about the workers is a bit confusing. Are they C. Halter, S. Griessmeyer, J. Wentzel, and J. Halter, or are we talking about different other workers imported from Europe? Where did they live, if Wistar's new homes were for additional workers, not the ones originally recruited?
"He arranged to lease 50 acres (20 ha) of land containing 18,000 cords (65,000 m3) of wood from John Ladd." Who or what was John Ladd?
"He then recruited experienced professional European glass artisans ..." Are these C. Halter, S. Griessmeyer, J. Wentzel, and J. Halter? If so, they should be introduced here, not in the following section.
"A company store was constructed for the workers' needs, which served as a place of credit for the workers and was used in exchange for wages." The company store was used in exchange for wages? I hardly think so. What does "used in exchange for wages" mean anyway? Surely everything the workers bought from anywhere was an exchange of their wages. Or did Wistar pay his workers all or some of their wages in tokens, to be exchanged at the company store? What did local residents without tokens use at the store, or could anyone – including the workers – also pay in cash?

Joint venture

"... the second between Wistar and Halter, and the third between Wistar, Griesmeyer and Halter". Which of the two Halters are we talking about? Were they related?

History

"It was an inexpensive traditional method that contained impurities and produced a greenish-yellow glass." Something wrong there. The method didn't contain impurities.
"... and therefore gave little importance to his glass business profits. I can't believe that any businessman wouldn't care about his profits. Do you mean that Wistar tried to hide his profits in some way, so as to avoid coming under suspicion from the British?
"When Wistar died Richard inherited the glass factory ..." We say this again two paragraphs further down, where this material ought to be moved.

References

The url given in ref #24 doesn't work.

@Eric Corbett: yes I know and already took it out with another dead link, however a bot automatically put them back in. I'm trying to figure out how to get around that bot so it doesn't put them back in if I take them out again. I working on them = thanks for alerting me! I will eventually get them out, somehow...--Doug Coldwell (talk) 19:59, 8 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Eric Corbett: I believe I solved the above issue of the bot automatically putting back in the dead links above. I have done some additional improvements and am ready for you to read it over. If you have any further issues, I will work to get them solved.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 21:16, 8 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm satisfied that this article now meets the GA criteria. Eric Corbett 18:29, 10 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.