User talk:McCuskerER/Lynching of George White

1. First, what does the article do well? Is there anything from your review that impressed you? Any turn of phrase that described the subject in a clear way?

The organization of your article is very easy to follow and it isn't too complicated/divided into too many sections. The amount of detail you have about the events leading up to the lynching, and what happened during the lynching itself, is substantial and extremely easy to follow. I also really enjoyed reading about the various perspectives that people had about the event through newspapers and individual beliefs. You also provide great coverage of the aftermath (the media coverage, public opinion, and legal action sections were both strong in this respect in exploring how the citizens of Wilmington continued on living after the lynching).

2. What changes would you suggest the author apply to the article? Why would those changes be an improvement?

I would expand upon the notions of racial tension and racist attitudes in Delaware, since the lynching took place there. I think the quote you provide from the documentary is great, but you could say more about it, and what the complex attitudes looked like in Delaware specifically. How do your sources speak to the social climate of Delaware?

I think you could also spend a bit more time talking about examples of lynchings in the Midwest, linking to other Wikipedia articles about these lynchings. As is, you only mention two Midwestern cities, which doesn't really speak to the increasing number of lynchings in the Midwest. What do your sources say about why Midwest lynchings are significant?

In your Media Coverage section, you do a great job explaining why African American opinions from newspapers are somewhat between the two distinct sides. You also suggest that most newspapers articulated a pro-White or a pro-lynch mob stance. I think you could more explicitly state the arguments for both sides, and who typically sided with each (Southerners, Northerners, men, women?). What did White's sympathizers argue? What did the lynch mob sympathizers argue? This is slightly unclear here.

I don't fully understand the distinction between the Media Coverage and Public Opinion sections. It seems you could just consolidate the sections under the title "Media Coverage" because both sections cover how the newspapers represented the lynching and government response to the crime, which is all technically under the umbrella of media coverage of the event.

I think you could mention more about the riots that occurred after people tried to legally apprehend the Avenging Cowboy (if it is in your sources). I had more questions about this additional mob violence. Additionally, I think the title of the section could indicate who the legal action was against? (i.e. Legal Action Against the Mob or something along those lines)

Last, I'm curious as to how the memorial plaque portrays George White's lynching. Maybe you could include a transcript of what the plaque says here? Considering the perspectives you present about the event in your article, I think it may be important to indicate the perspective of the public memorial that now exists for him.

3. What's the most important thing the author could do to improve the article?

The most important thing to fix in my opinion is considering the context of Delaware in your background section. I think you need to devote much more time to Delaware, considering that a lynching in Delaware is already somewhat peculiar, so expanding on the social context of Delaware is even more important to establish than that of the United States. It's important to have the reader thinking about race relations in Delaware. You could even separate your background section into two components: Social Climate of the United States and Social Climate of Delaware.

4. Did you notice anything about the article you reviewed that could be applicable to your own article?

Your lead section is very strong and concise, and I want to emulate that in my lead section, which I think is a bit too long. Specifically, you did a great job selecting the most important facts and components of the lynching to include there. I also think having the section about Modern Mentions was important, and I want to pursue any mention of my event (the Fernwood Park race riot of 1947) in a modern context. Thus, I will consider writing about the scholarly arguments in my secondary sources on the Fernwood Park race riot and the different portrayals of the event.

Feel free to let me know if you have any questions! Coffmanse (talk) 00:35, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

1. Your article is super informational. I think If I was writing a paper on the lynching go George White this would be a great source. 2. I think the length of the article is long. I personally don't like to read so much from wikipedia. 3. Maybe just condensing the article a little bit. However I think you did a god job simplifying the information in your sections like I think its just long because of the amount of sections. 4. I loved the three points in your aftermath section. I think those three parts can be applied to my topic/ protest aswell ! Delucamj (talk) 22:51, 1 March 2020 (UTC)May