User:CGJohnston21/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Anti-Federalism

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
Anti-Federalism is a topic in American history and politics that did not get discussed often. In my high school history class the topic was barely even mentioned. Nevertheless, Anti-Federalism is an important part of American history because of the way it shaped the Constitution through the Bill of Rights. The Wikipedia page on this topic seems short to me and could use a few improvements.

Evaluate the article

 * The opening line of the article is good enough but the rest of the paragraph could use some work. It isn't fair to say Patrick Henry led the Anti-Federalists because they were not a strict group like the Federalists were. Instead the Anti-Federalists were a loose coalition with no true party structure. It was an unofficial grouping. I also can't find any source that claims the Anti-Federalists feared the office of the president turning into a monarchy. I would instead state that they feared tyranny from a strong federal government.
 * The "Nomenclature" section is interesting but should perhaps be part of the lead instead of its own section. I don't think it need a quote either.
 * The "Main Beliefs" section needs a source that isn't from a high school. I'm fairly certain that the beliefs aren't accurate.
 * The history section could use some work. The first paragraph has a quote that needs to be removed.
 * "As the Federalists moved to amend the Articles" The Federalists headed by Hamilton and Madison did not want to amend the Articles, they wanted to replace them with the Constitution.
 * I Think its important that the article not speculate the identities of the anonymous writers of the Anti-Federalist Papers, such as Brutus and the Federal Farmer. There is no proof as to their identities and historians do not agree. If the article must discuss their identities (which I don't think it should) it should be in its own section.
 * "threat to the rights of individuals and that the president would become a king" needs a source. I'm not certain they explicitly or implicitly claim this.
 * The wording towards the end of the third paragraph uses unclear language.
 * The structure of this section is not approachable. Maybe the History section could be further divided. This inclusion of some more images would make the article more approachable.
 * The Notable Anti-Federalists section is missing links to Brutus (Antifederalist) and others. The articles content is mostly good but some re-wording would be good. CGJohnston21 (talk) 02:51, 22 April 2023 (UTC)