Wikipedia:Peer review/Birth control movement in the United States/archive1

===Birth control movement in the United States=== This peer review discussion has been closed. I've listed this article for peer review because I'm planning on submitting the article to FAC, and I'd like to meet all the FA requirements beforehand, so I don't waste reviewers' time at FAC. I'd appreciate it if the PR reviewer were familiar with the FAC process and FA requirements. I'm looking for this peer review to act as a dry-run of the FAC, so don't hold back the criticisms! Thanks. -- Noleander (talk) 05:13, 9 November 2011 (UTC) :Note: Because of its length, this peer review is not transcluded. It is still open and located at Peer review/Birth control movement in the United States/archive1.

Brianboulton comments: This is an interesting and important article. It will take me a while to review it all, but here are some comments on the early sections:
 * Infobox:
 * I wonder about the value of an infobox for this article. It doesn't really give sufficient information to be really useful; better, perhaps, to rely on a succinct lead section
 * My preference is to leave it in, based on aesthetics ... I believe it makes the article more inviting. But if you believe it may be an obstacle to FA status, I'll remove it. --Noleander (talk) 23:02, 14 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Lead
 * At present I think the lead, particularly the opening section, is a little overdetailed; we don't need at this stage the information about Sanger's husband's arrest, especially as no reason is indicated for this. Also, having said that the campaign's object was to make contraception legal in America, you need to indicate the extent to which it had become illegal.
 * Done. --Noleander (talk) 23:02, 14 November 2011 (UTC)


 * There are a few prose issues, e.g. "hundreds regional birth control organizations" (word "of" missing), and the phrase "on the books" is too imprecise for an encyclopedia article
 * Done. --Noleander (talk) 23:02, 14 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Birth control practices
 * "Prior to 1914, when the birth control movement in the U.S. began, birth control was widely practiced in the U.S...." Rephrase to avoid repetions, e.g. "Prior to 1914, when the birth control movement in the U.S. began, the practice was common throughout the country".
 * Done. --Noleander (talk) 23:02, 14 November 2011 (UTC)


 * "U.S." or "America": both terms are employed throughout the article. I believe that here, "America" always means the US, but you need to be sure that statements avoid ambiguity.
 * Yes, I was striving for literary variation, but America could be misconstrued, so I'll change those to U.S. where it may be misleading. --Noleander (talk) 23:02, 14 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Done.--Noleander (talk) 23:12, 14 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Explain and/or link fertility rate
 * Done. --Noleander (talk) 23:12, 14 November 2011 (UTC)


 * "Emphasized douching"? Reads oddly; would "recommended" be clearer?
 * Good catch. Done. --Noleander (talk) 23:12, 14 November 2011 (UTC)


 * You need to say that Bradlaugh and Besant were prosecuted before saying they were acquitted. Give the year of their trial
 * Done. --Noleander (talk) 23:12, 14 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Can a survey that extended from 1892 to 1912 be accurately described as a "survey of American women's contraceptive habits in the 19th century"?
 * Done. --Noleander (talk) 23:12, 14 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Contraception is outlawed
 * Suggest delete "is" from title
 * Done. --Noleander (talk) 23:12, 14 November 2011 (UTC)


 * "Contraception was legal throughout most of the nineteenth century..." Insert the words "in the U.S."
 * Done. --Noleander (talk) 23:23, 14 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Give dates for Civil War (lots of non-American readers won't know when it was)
 * Done. --Noleander (talk) 23:23, 14 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Some lack of clarity in the narrative. I understand that the federal Comstock Act banned the distribution of contraceptives throughout the US, and that some (unnamed) states extended the ban to the use of contraceptives. At the end of the section the implication seems to be that the ban on use had become more general. Is this so? What, eactly, was the legal position at the end of the 19th century?
 * I've improved the wording to make it clear that enforcement (of exiting laws) increased in 1890s, leading to contraception "going underground" at the turn of the century. --Noleander (talk) 23:23, 14 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Free speech movement
 * "Sanger became convinced that elitism prevented working-class women, who needed it most, from obtaining contraception" Just elitism, not the fact that it was illegal?
 * Done. --Noleander (talk) 23:23, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

That's a start; I'll be back with more, soon Brianboulton (talk) 23:06, 13 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks so much! I'll get right on these tasks. --Noleander (talk) 22:49, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Next instalment:-
 * Free speech movement
 * Journals (e.g. Harper's Weekly and the New York Tribune) do not "write" articles; they may "publish", or "commission" them.
 * Done. --Noleander (talk) 19:18, 16 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Early birth control organizations
 * Copyedit & punc checks carried out - should be checked
 * Done. --Noleander (talk) 19:18, 16 November 2011 (UTC)


 * First birth control clinic
 * "birth control clinics following the Dutch model" → "birth control clinics based on the Dutch model."
 * Done. --Noleander (talk) 19:18, 16 November 2011 (UTC)


 * "The clinic was shut down, and another birth control clinic would not open again until 1923". Clumsy wording; " another birth control clinic would not open again" doesn't make sense. I know what you mean, but...
 * Hmmm. I changed it to " The clinic was shut down, and it was not until 1923 that another birth control was opened." Which seems okay to my ears, but maybe that is odd also?  --Noleander (talk) 19:18, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
 * That doesn't make sense, either: "another birth control was opened"?? Perhaps "another birth control facility was opened". And presumably you should specify "in New York".
 * Sorry about that ... typing too fast! It now reads "The clinic was shut down, and it was not until 1923 that another birth control clinic was opened in the United States." --Noleander (talk) 23:45, 17 November 2011 (UTC)


 * "The trial of Sanger, in January 1917, was a watershed event in the movement's history:" Is this opinion specifically covered in the citation at the end of the sentence? Otherwise it needs to be cited separately.
 * Done. "watershed" was not in sources, so I removed it and re-worded. --Noleander (talk) 19:18, 16 November 2011 (UTC)


 * "Despite the strong support, Sanger was convicted, and the judge offered a more lenient sentence if she promised to not break the law again, but Sanger replied 'I cannot respect the law as it exists today'." Not an "and" senetnce. Suggest semicolon after "convicted", then "the judge offered..."  I'd also say "a lenient sentence" rather than "a more lenient sentence, since no sentence has yet been mentioned.
 * Done. --Noleander (talk) 19:18, 16 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Going mainstream
 * "from the trial" - specify "Sanger's trial"
 * Done. --Noleander (talk) 19:27, 16 November 2011 (UTC)


 * "Sanger, a self-promoter who jealously fought for the public limelight..." Such descriptions need to be attributed, as well as cited.
 * Done. --Noleander (talk) 19:27, 16 November 2011 (UTC)


 * The fact that several films on birth control were made in the 1910s does not of itself indicate that the topic had captured the public's attention. You'd need to show that there was a level of interest in these films.
 * Done. Reworded to "...representative of increasing media coverage of the topic"  --Noleander (talk) 19:27, 16 November 2011 (UTC)


 * "women who would choose of "ease and fashion" over motherhood" - what is "of" doing there?
 * Done. --Noleander (talk) 19:27, 16 November 2011 (UTC)


 * "Over the course of ten years". Perhaps "Over the course of the following ten years..."
 * Done. --Noleander (talk) 19:27, 16 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Legal victory
 * "This ruling was only binding within New York, but it opened the door for birth control clinics, under physician supervision, to be established." The "but" is awkward her, since the second part of the sentence does not qualift the first. Suggest replce "but" with "where"
 * Done. --Noleander (talk) 19:37, 16 November 2011 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure about the parenthetical "it did not". Better, I think to say "wrongly believing"
 * Done. Changed to " ... wrongly expecting that the medical profession ..." --Noleander (talk) 19:37, 16 November 2011 (UTC)


 * World War I and condoms
 * "in Europe, they found rubber condoms readily available, and when they returned to America, they continued to use condoms as their preferred method of birth control." That suggests that they were readily avaialable in the US, too - was that the case?
 * My reading of the sources is that there was a feedback loop: there was huge demand generated by the returning soldiers, and that prompted several companies to increase their manufacturing capacities. But, yes, condoms were always available, often underground.  A lot depended on enforcement of laws which varied widely from state to state, and from DA to DA.  Many laws were not enforced. --Noleander (talk) 19:37, 16 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Legislative efforts
 * For consistency, don't use "WWI" abbreviation
 * Done. --Noleander (talk) 19:37, 16 November 2011 (UTC)


 * "In 1919, Dennett published The Sex Side of Life, which became a widely distributed educational pamphlet in the 1920s, treating sex as a natural and enjoyable act". Needs reordering, along the ines: "In 1919, Dennett published an educational pamphlet, The Sex Side of Life, which treated sex as a natural and enjoyable act and was widely distributed".
 * Done. --Noleander (talk) 19:37, 16 November 2011 (UTC)


 * The narrative would flow better if the next sentence began, "However, in the same year, frustrated...etc" (and drop "in 1919" at the sentence's end.
 * Done. --Noleander (talk) 19:37, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

More soon.... Brianboulton (talk) 19:02, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

Final comments
 * American Birth Control League
 * Sanger was arrested for disorderly conduct ... but we hear no more of this. What happened to her?
 * Done. --Noleander (talk) 20:29, 18 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Second birth control clinic
 * "to make it legal under the court ruling" - what court ruling?
 * Done. --Noleander (talk) 20:29, 18 November 2011 (UTC)


 * "pretense" is rather strong, and suggests dishonesty. Suggest alter to "guise"
 * Done. --Noleander (talk) 20:29, 18 November 2011 (UTC)


 * "after ten years of progress" I think you mean "ten years of struggle" rather than "progress"
 * Done. --Noleander (talk) 20:29, 18 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Widespread acceptance
 * ..."the emergence of a sexually permissive society which was marked by prohibition, flappers, and speakeasys." This reads very oddly. The term "a sexually permissive society" surely needs qualifying, e.g. "a more sexually relaxed society". And how on earth do speakeasys and prohibition mark a sexually permissive society?
 * I removed the flappers/speakeasys ... although they were in the source, as examples of the change from Victorian era to the wild 1920s.  "relaxed" has some problems of its own ... I'll try to think of a better wording. --Noleander (talk) 20:29, 18 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Opposition
 * "refused to cover birth control" Perhaps "refused to cover stories related to birth control".
 * Done --Noleander (talk) 20:29, 18 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Eugenics and race
 * "They assumed that African-Americans were backwards..." I assume you mean "backward", not "backwards", and I suggest you qualify to "intellectually backward".
 * Done. --Noleander (talk) 20:29, 18 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Expanding availability
 * The word "insensible", if it is the judge's, should be in quotes
 * No, that is not a quote from the judge, but I changed it to " not legally sound." --Noleander (talk) 20:29, 18 November 2011 (UTC)


 * This sentence "The diaphragm was confiscated by the U.S. government, and Sanger's subsequent legal challenge led to a 1936 court decision by Judge Augustus Hand which overturned an important provision of the anti-contraception laws which prohibited physicians from obtaining contraceptives" is too long, and needs splitting. You should never have "which" twice in a single sentence.
 * Done. --Noleander (talk) 20:29, 18 November 2011 (UTC)


 * The next sentence, beginning "This court victory..." is likewise too long.
 * Done. --Noleander (talk) 20:29, 18 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Planned Parenthood organization
 * "The 1936 court battle..." Specify; these various court cases can be confusing
 * Done. --Noleander (talk) 20:29, 18 November 2011 (UTC)


 * "...the two leading birth control organizations in America – the ABCL and the Birth Control Clinical Research Bureau (BCCRB)..." There has been no previous mention in the article of the BCCRB, so how is it now one of the leading birth control organisations
 * This is a tough one. I've improved it to: "The 1936 One Package court battle brought together two birth control organizations – the ABCL and the Birth Control Clinical Research Bureau (formerly the CRB)  ..."   The CRB is defined earlier in the article.  Sanger renamed it from CRB to BCCRB at some point. --Noleander (talk) 20:44, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

It's a bit disappointing that the final section gives no information about what happened to Sanger or to any other pioneers of the birth control movement. A short paragraph to this effect would round the article off nicely.
 * After World War II

That concludes my review. I hope you have found these comments helpful. It's an impressive article, well-written and covering the subject comprehensively; it certainly has the makings of an FAC, and with a bit of final polishing I don't see why it shouldn't succeed - though bear in mind that there are aspects such as images and sources that I have not examined. Good luck with it. Brianboulton (talk) 20:02, 18 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much. I really appreciate your help.  Let me know if I can return the favor sometime. --Noleander (talk) 20:54, 18 November 2011 (UTC)