Talk:Woman's club movement in the United States/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: SusunW (talk · contribs) 16:00, 20 December 2017 (UTC)

I have read through the article and will be assessing it. As I have never done this before, bear with me.

Criteria

Good Article Status - Review Criteria

Further information: WP:WIAGA

A good article is—

1. Well-written:

(a) the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct; and

(b) 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:

(a) it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline;

(b) 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);

(c) it contains no original research; and

(d) it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.

3. Broad in its coverage:

(a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic; and

(b) 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:

(a) media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content; and

(b) media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.

Review

1. Well-written:

Criteria	Notes	Result
(a) (prose)	See below	Pass
(b) (MoS)	See below	Pass

Lede

The only issue I see with the lede summary is the reason that the "movement" occurred and then waned. From the article, it is clear that when women had no legal identity they joined clubs as a means of civic participation. As laws were passed to secure and define women's citizenship, club membership became less vital, as women's rights were protected and they could broadly participate in society.

Tweaked the lede. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 18:16, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

History

1. Why was abolition less of an issue in the American West? To people unfamiliar with US history the reason is unapparent. Maybe you should mention the Missouri Compromise's prohibition of the introduction of slavery to western states to place the statement in historical context? [1]  Done
2. "The GFWC grew to around a half a million women by 1914" …Source states 1.5 million, which is supported by [2] which says at the founding of the GFWC there were 20,000 members, which increased to more than 1 million by 1910.  Done
3. "Women in clubs raised money, worked with the Red Cross and more" … more is rather vague. Might be better to state, "and performed other activities such as," … Woman's clubs knitteding socks, rolleding bandages for soldiers and sold selling war bonds.  Done
4. The paragraph beginning "The GFWC excluded African-American clubs from their membership", would be better placed earlier in the history section, as it is reflecting formational ideology. Perhaps it should be moved to precede "Sorosis and the GFWC saw large increases in membership in 1889 and 1890".  Done
5. "and sometimes also" replace with ", as well as"  Done
6. "White women's clubs ignored race" might be better stated as "ignored racist inequalities" or "ignored racist norms/societal policies/segregationist policy"? Ignoring race implies that it did not matter, but the fact that black women were excluded from membership makes it clear that race was important to them. Rather, the issues related to race were too controversial for them to want to tackle.  Done

____________________________________

1. I'm removing that part. Looking into the research, there's not enough to expand on that for now. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 18:29, 21 December 2017 (UTC)
2. Fixed the numbers. I think I misread the number of women in the Wood/Pennybacker source. :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 18:35, 21 December 2017 (UTC)
3. Fixed the WWI section. The first source talks about setting up communications (which was the "and more") and the second deals with the small practical things women did. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 18:38, 21 December 2017 (UTC)
4. Moved Megalibrarygirl (talk) 18:45, 21 December 2017 (UTC)
5. Fixed, I think. :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 18:45, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

African-American club movement

1. After slavery was ended in the United States..when?  Done
2. ”…devoid of morality, sexually wanton…” ref says p=92, but I find the ref on p=492  Done
3. ”Well's anti-lynching campaign set off”, possibly angered or provoked is a better word? Set off is, simply, divided, which doesn’t imply that it necessarily angered the press president.  Done

__________________

1. Date added. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 18:51, 21 December 2017 (UTC)
2. Oops! Typo. Fixed. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 18:51, 21 December 2017 (UTC)
3. I like "provoked." Megalibrarygirl (talk) 18:51, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

Impact

1. entire paragraph is unsourced.  Done sources added. :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 19:00, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

Education

1. "surrounding class size", do you mean classroom size?  Done
2. "create educational efforts", do you mean educational opportunities?  Done

Art and music

1. After "Clubs also hosted arts exhibits", it might mention that African-American women used events to create acceptance of their community's cultural traditions. (Rabaka, p=59) The source states that it was one of the most important functions in raising social consciousness, so it appears important to note.  Done

___________

1. I'm glad you pointed this out. This led me to finding another source and more info which I think will lead to another article on an African American Women's Club. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 00:20, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

Libraries

1. Possibly merge "When libraries were threatened with elimination..." with the previous paragraphs? It seems odd to have a single sentence as a paragraph.  Done

Legal reform

1. "An act passed on March 2, 1907" link Expatriation Act of 1907  Done
2. ... "made it the law" possibly would be simpler just using "required"?  Done
3. Perhaps introducing that the Expatriation Act created inequality is important? Foreign-born women gained American citizenship upon marrying a male with US citizenship, but American-born women lost citizenship if they married a foreigner. Thus married women within the society were unequal under the law.
4. "Women needed to have citizenship independent of their husbands.[174] It was important to establish citizenship for the right to vote." Might be more clearly worded as "For women to attain a civic or legal identity, such as the right to vote, they needed to have independence from their husbands' citizenship" as it is evident that they didn't actually need to have separate citizenship unless their civic and legal identity was recognized.  Done

---

Not sure how to address #3. I don't remember running into that as a problem that WC's dealt with. They seemed more worried about losing citizenship... though the women getting citizenship through marriage may have been part of their anxiousness about immigration (esp with the white women). Megalibrarygirl (talk) 00:33, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

I picked that up from your source by Megan Smith. You are probably right that they did not focus on it--just like mainstream women's rights movements failed for the most part to understand the differences in minority communities and working class women. To me it is fascinating because it is such a narrow view of expanding human rights. It is, for me, interesting to see how we have evolved in our struggles. ;) SusunW (talk) 16:05, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

Fashion

1. Combine the sentences into a paragraph. One sentence is typically not considered a paragraph.  Done
2. Maybe omit "Women's clubs also" and state "Other clubs"  Done
3. "use of bird feathers", should just be linked to <no wiki>use of bird feathers</no wiki>, omitting the see also phrase and appending "as a means of protecting wildlife".  Done
2. Verifiable with no original research:

Criteria	Notes	Result
(a) (references)	All statements appear to be supported by the cited references, with the one exception noted above for correction.	Pass
(b) (citations to reliable sources)	Sourcing appears to be reliable and does not rely on uncurated material.	Pass
(c) (original research)	There does not appear to be any original research.	Pass
(d) (copyvio and plagiarism)	There do not appear to be copy violations or plagerism from a spot check of sourcing and Earwig review.	Pass

3. Broad in its coverage:

Criteria	Notes	Result
(a) (major aspects)	The article broadly discusses the movement and issues upon which groups focused. As human rights is a huge field, it would be impossible for any article to cover all aspects of a social movement, but the major concerns of women in the period were discussed.	Pass
(b) (focused)	The article does not veer off into unrelated information or topics.	Pass

4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.

Notes	Result
The content of the article appears to be neutral and unbiased	Pass

5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.

Notes	Result
Article is stable, no apparent editwarring

6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:

Criteria	Notes	Result
(a) (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales)	All images appear to have appropriate licensing information appended.	Pass
(b) (appropriate use with suitable captions)	All images have captions and appear to be illustrative of topics related to the article.	Pass

Result

Result	Notes
Pass	appears to meet criteria

Discussion

Overall the article is well written and broadly discusses the subject matter in a neutral manner. In the opinion of the reviewer, clarification of a few items is needed. Should you have any questions or wish to discuss any of the points raised, please let me know. SusunW (talk) 20:51, 20 December 2017 (UTC)

@SusunW: I addressed most of the issues and I found a new source with cool information that has led me down a new rabbit hole. :D Let me know what you think of my changes and I'm so glad you were my reviewer. :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 00:38, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

@Megalibrarygirl: I think you've addressed all the concerns and comments I had. And yes, new rabbit holes--now I am fascinated by that marriage thing. I have seen it impact many of the women I have written about when they lost citizenship, and am now curious about how it effected women who gained other citizenship. Was it ever beneficial? Hmmmmm SusunW (talk) 16:19, 22 December 2017 (UTC)