Talk:Cone Mills Corporation/GA4

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Reviewer: Firefangledfeathers (talk · contribs) 03:24, 4 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi. I am excited to work with you on this article. I should have a couple sections reviewed in the next hour or so. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 03:24, 4 June 2022 (UTC) striking 03:29, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I see I have some old GAs to dig through before I start on sections. Bear with me. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 03:29, 4 June 2022 (UTC)

, I'm sorry to say that this is a under criterion 5: "issues from previous GA nominations have not been adequately considered". Issues raised in GA2 (abandoned/withdrawn) and reiterated in GA3 (quick fail) remain substantively unaddressed. Work has been done to address paternalism, labor disputes, and treatment of Black employees. All need lengthier treatment for the article to reasonably be described as "broad" in its coverage of these major topics. In particular, the GA2 and GA3 comments about labor strikes and disputes have not been substantively addressed by the addition of a mention of one 1951 strike. Sources that could be used for this were raised in GA2. One, Hanging by a Thread, is available on Open Library. Early unionization, management's attitudes and responses, and strikes/picketing/slow-downs/stretch-outs in the early 1900s through to at least 2003 all need at least a surface treatment. The Cone's paternalism is presented mostly positively right now, but they locked the company store, marched armed men around the town, and evicted families in order to break the first attempt at unionization. Paternalism and unionization were directly contrasted in the early 1930s with "either the union or the ham". What would be sections in a "comprehensive" featured article could be just a few paragraphs in a "broad" good article, but it's not there yet. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 04:50, 4 June 2022 (UTC)