Talk:Federalist No. 3/GA2

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

Reviewer: LunaEatsTuna (talk · contribs) 00:04, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

Will review.  ツ LunaEatsTuna  (💬)— 00:04, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Another interesting read on your journey of Federalist GAs—on hold. Over to you!  ツ LunaEatsTuna  (💬)— 16:25, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
 * I've addressed each of your notes. I've also added another image to the article–something I'd like to do with these articles whenever possible–though I'm wondering if there's a better image that could be added. Thebiguglyalien  ( talk ) 21:12, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks; looks good! I really like the current image you added as it adds a lot of context. I think such images are a good idea for the other articles as well. Passing per your changes implemented. P.S. I was waiting for you to get to this before I started on Federalist No. 4, which I will get too within the following day or so.  ツ LunaEatsTuna  (💬)— 22:59, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

Copyvio check
Earwig says good to go. Only flags it gives are regarding the long title (The Same Subject Continued: Concerning Dangers from Foreign Force and Influence), so no concerns there.

File(s)
The portrait of John Jay is of good quality, copyright-free and relevant to the article.

Prose

 * "He explains that the most wars are caused by violations of treaties or acts of violence" – for personal clarification, is he arguing that the majority of all wars are caused in this way or that a lot of wars are?
 * He wrote that "for the most part" it's one of these two, which I understand to mean the majority. Thebiguglyalien  ( talk ) 21:12, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
 * "acts of violence, and he says" – he is not necessary here as it is mentioned at the start of the sentence; removing he also removes some redundancy from the rest of the paragraph.
 * Fixed. Thebiguglyalien  ( talk ) 21:12, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
 * "diplomatic incidents" sounds somewhat vague IMO. How about "diplomatic disputes", "diplomatic conflicts" etc, or does Jay refer to something vague himself?
 * I've dodged the issue entirely by changing it to diplomacy. I figure it's better to keep it simpler when writing summaries like this. Thebiguglyalien  ( talk ) 21:12, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Apologies for the pedantry, but the successive four sentences each begin with "[number], he argues" which gets quite redundant. Could you rephrase some of them? The last sentence is fine as it is unique enough since it concludes the paragraph.
 * Changed the wording. Thebiguglyalien  ( talk ) 21:12, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
 * I do not see a need to italicise powerful. If he did that himself for emphasis, add [Jay's italics] next to it.
 * I've removed the italics. Thebiguglyalien  ( talk ) 21:12, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
 * I doubt we need to wikilink treaty (this goes for the lead as well).
 * De-linked. Thebiguglyalien  ( talk ) 21:12, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Recommend wikilinking the British Empire and Spanish Empire. I reckon a number of readers would know little to nothing about these polities.
 * Linked. Thebiguglyalien  ( talk ) 21:12, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

The rest is genuinely exceptionally well-written, and I could find no further concerns…

Refs
Passes spotcheck on refs 1, 5 (cited four times) and 8 (also cited four times).