Talk:Scotland County, North Carolina/GA1

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

Reviewer: Thebiguglyalien (talk · contribs) 00:34, 29 August 2023 (UTC)

I'll have a review written for this within the next few days. Thebiguglyalien ( talk ) 00:34, 29 August 2023 (UTC)

, very close to GA already, just a few things to look at and a few suggestions for more info to include. And I'll be honest: I've worked on several difficult reviews in the last few days, so I specifically sought out one with your name on it because I wanted to review an article that wouldn't need significant fixing. Thebiguglyalien ( talk ) 19:59, 29 August 2023 (UTC)

Looking through, the review seems just about finished. The only significant thing to look at now is to see if more detail can be found about the weather/climate. The religion info looks good, it wouldn't hurt to include some basic statistics if you want to. I don't love the North Carolina History Project source, but it's not being used for any contentious claims, so I won't demand that it's replaced. Other than that, the only other note I see is that you could optionally add the info from Marks (2021) about the largest cotton oil mill if you haven't already. But again, the weather/climate is the only thing I'm waiting on before passing the review. Thebiguglyalien ( talk ) 20:25, 3 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Haha, working on it as your wrote that comment! We'll see what I can dig up. -Indy beetle (talk) 21:22, 3 September 2023 (UTC)
 * I struggled with the weather things, but it seems Disco dug up some info on average temperatures and annual precipitation which satisfies this. -Indy beetle (talk) 03:13, 5 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Have all the changes been made? Let me know whenever it's ready for another look. Thebiguglyalien  ( talk ) 20:02, 5 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Yes, everything should be addressed now. -Indy beetle (talk) 07:15, 6 September 2023 (UTC)


 * Well-written


 * Collapsible content should be avoided in articles. I won't make a big deal out of it if it's unavoidable, but consider whether there are any other ways to display the information.
 * The collapsed content is purely PRIMARY raw data extras, used like one would use images. I would prefer extensive secondary source-based discussion in lieu of of long-term county demographic changes and presidential election swings, but such rarely seems to exist, and almost all US county articles have had such tables dumped into them as short-hand for what change has occurred over the past 100 or so years. I find no satisfactory alternative and since leaving them un-collapsed creates an utter mess of formatting, I have collapsed them. -IB
 * There are a lot of one paragraph sections. Not much can be done for most of it, but see if there are any unnecessary headings. The law and government section probably doesn't need subheadings since the ideas are already divided by paragraph.
 * Removed one subsection from the law and government section. I essentially used Robeson County, North Carolina as a template for various NC county articles I worked on, which I suppose was aspirational, since Scotland and several other counties don't quite have as much information which can be as neatly sorted as there. I think the other remaining subsections are reasonably appropriate, even if they are small. If you think otherwise, I welcome you to say what you think could be improved. -IB
 * By the late 1800s – I suggest late 19th century to avoid confusion with 1800s (decade).
 * Done. DiscoA340 (talk) 21:32, 29 August 2023 (UTC)


 * Democrats regained a majority in the General Assembly. – This doesn't have any transitions or context, which would help readability.
 * Mild revision. I think the earlier portions of that paragraph do enough to suggest the political situation. -IB
 * began operating as an effective unit of government – I'm sure this is technically correct, but there's probably a simpler way to say this
 * Revised as The creation of Scotland County took official effect on December 10, 1900. -IB
 * No black people were allowed to register – "black people" feels informal. Would "black citizens" work?
 * Done. DiscoA340 (talk) 21:32, 29 August 2023 (UTC)


 * many tenant farmers and sharecroppers were put out of work and migrated north in search of employment – migrated from the Deep South to North Carolina, or migrated from North Carolina to the Northern U.S.?
 * Added the word "local". Marks was speaking to farmers in Scotland County specifically, though I do believe this was part of a wider trend. -IB
 * When Camp Mackall and Laurinburg–Maxton Army Base are discussed, I assumed that the next sentences would be about both of them. It might help readability if "Laurinburg–Maxton" appears once more in the next sentence or two to make it clear that we're specifically focusing on that.
 * Done. -IB
 * As of the 2020 United States census, there were 34,174 people, – In the whole world?!
 * Fixed. DiscoA340 (talk) 21:22, 29 August 2023 (UTC)


 * Would the parenthetical notes under transportation make sense to the average reader?
 * you mind taking this one? I'm not as familiar with planned/federally-intended highway routes. -Indy beetle (talk) 08:05, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
 * @Indy beetle I restructured the first sentence to make it easier to read for the average viewer. Though I think the other parentheses are more readable/distinguishable because they are linked separately from their parent route. Is there anything else you need help with? Have a great day! DiscoA340 (talk) 14:40, 31 August 2023 (UTC)


 * Verifiable with no original research


 * What makes North Carolina History Project, NCpedia, and uselectionatlas.org reliable sources?
 * I can vouch for NCpedia because it's run by the state library. Upon further investigation, North Carolina History Project does cite its sources at the bottom of both pages. Can't really comment for uselectionatlas.org but it is used by most county articles and it seems to be well regarded by political scientists. DiscoA340 (talk) 21:22, 29 August 2023 (UTC)


 * NCPedia is run by the North Carolina Government & Heritage Library, a division of the State Library of North Carolina. The Mazzocchi article is an authorized reprint from the 2006 Encyclopedia of North Carolina released by the University of North Carolina Press. The North Carolina History Project is an old project of the John Locke Foundation, a conservative North Carolina-focused think tank. While their stuff on political/social issues might be questionable for factual statements, the History Project material always struck me as relatively benign, even if promoting free market ideas is broadly part of its mission. At any rate, a bibliography is cited. Some their material is written by historians, though the particular article cited here was not. - IB
 * LeGrand (2005) is inaccessible, including through the Wayback Machine
 * @Indy beetle I found this link (https://cdm16062.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/p249901coll22/id/190620) for LeGrand (2005). Is this the correct copy? DiscoA340 (talk) 21:22, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
 * That link isn't displaying anything for me. -Indy beetle (talk) 06:14, 1 September 2023 (UTC)


 * Here is a functional link of the document from a third party: . -Indy beetle (talk) 06:17, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

Spot checks:
 * Covington & Ellis (1999) pp. 3–5: Does this support Scotland's black population increased in the 1910s and early 1920s as tenant cotton farmers moved north from the Deep South to escape areas infested by the boll weevil?
 * Specific cite added. Page 4 says "Most of the McNair lands [John F. McNair was among the most prominent landowners in the county at the time] were tended by black tenant farmers, many of whom had migrated to the cotton fields of the Carolina coastal plains after the boll weevil devastated crops in the Deep South. Between 1910 and 1925, North Carolina had the largest increase in black farmers in the nation, many of them in Scotland County." -IB
 * Nguyen (2021)
 * Nagem (2022)
 * Vincent (2021) This source also covers the total county population in 2020, so the census source can be removed there.
 * Done - IB
 * Marks (2021) pp. 57–60 This says it was the largest cotton oil mill in the state, which might be worth noting, either in history or in economy.
 * Noted.


 * Broad in its coverage

With something as general as a county, there are a lot of things that could be mentioned, but these are the ones that stood out to me: I found a few links which may be useful. 1 2 3 4 - Disco
 * Can more be said about the weather and the climate? Speaking as someone from Arizona, I wouldn't call something a "hot summer" until it's over 100 degrees Fahrenheit
 * Sandhills Game Land and Lumber River State Park are mentioned. Are these the only major parks and recreation type areas in the county?
 * To my best knowledge these are the only major protected areas in the country (excluding municipal parks) DiscoA340 (talk) 21:32, 29 August 2023 (UTC)


 * The article mentions a relatively high population of American Indians. Is there more information about which groups (currently Cheraw and Lumbee are mentioned)? Are there any Indian reservations in the county?
 * There is rather little information specific to Scotland. Cheraw is widely recognized as the group which historically resided in this region of NC. The Lumbee are of somewhat dubious origins and are recognized by the state but not entirely by the federal government (they are considered Native Americans in the census and in federal records but get no benefits afford to most recognized groups, such as federal healthcare or sovereignty, etc.), so they have no reservation. Scotland is considered part of the jurisdiction of the Lumbee tribal organization, which is mentioned. -IB
 * What are the religious demographics? I'm going to take a shot in the dark and say it leans Christian, but is there information about what denominations?
 * There is some difficulty in ascertaining this. Christianity has a significant presence, yes (as with just about any Southern US county), with Presbyterian congregations founded specifically due to the Scottish ancestry in the area, but as for a proper discussion of religious affiliation, I have not found anything workable. The US Census does not ask religion questions. -IB
 * Update, found this, but it is all raw data. -IB

No ideas are given undue weight.
 * Neutral

No recent disputes. Information in this article is unlikely to significantly change.
 * Stable

The flag, seal, and logo are all non-free use, but this appears to be common practice for county articles. All other images are licensed or public domain.
 * Illustrated