Wikipedia:Peer review/Indiana Territory/archive1

Indiana Territory

 * A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style; it can be found on the automated peer review page for April 2009.
 * A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style; it can be found on the automated peer review page for April 2009.

This peer review discussion has been closed.

I would like to work on bringing this article up to featured quality. I would like some outside input as to what the article might be lacking. Most importantly, is there anything in the article that is not well explained? I have used alot of summary style writing, and put many of the details on the sub article pages.

Thanks, Charles Edward (Talk) 14:56, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Comments from

The article text looks generally in pretty good shape, so I'm going to make mainly formatting-related comments. Also, it's probably worth noting that this is the first time I've peer reviewed an article. *Everything under sources Hope this helps a little bit, I seem to have written an awful lot. — Hysteria18 (Talk • Contributions) 20:13, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
 * General points:
 * There are lots of linked dates, all of which should be delinked per WP:MOSNUM
 * Issues relating to the map in the infobox:
 * Firstly, it could be vectorised. Unless you're familiar with Inkscape yourself, you should probably make a request with the fine folks at the graphic lab's map workshop.
 * It could also do with a legend (use the legend template), the text on the map shows what's what pretty clearly, but it could be that bit clearer.
 * Two last points: are the rivers necessary? I can see they form parts of borders, but they don't add much to my personal understanding of the geography of the area. Also, modern-day state names might be of use to show which states fell within the boundaries of Indiana Territory at one time or another. Both just suggestions, it's entirely up to you whether you decide to act on them.
 * Lead:
 * President could be linked.
 * Indiana should probably be linked in its first occurence, at the end of the first paragraph.
 * "the territory's militia and regulars" should be explained or, if possible, linked.
 * I'm not sure about this, but "constitutional convention" could link to the (first) section of that name in Constitution of Indiana.
 * Original boundaries:
 * "83 deg 45 min W longitude" is unclear. There are probably conventions for these things, but this is unlikely to be understood completely by anyone very much. Should "deg" be "°"? If "W" means "West", that would benefit from being spelled out. Longitude could be linked.
 * "as well as the portions of Minnesota ." - unnecessary word and unnecessary space before the full stop.
 * Government:
 * Was William Henry Harrison actually apppointed by all three presidents listed, or was he appointed by one and served through the terms of the others? If the former, ignore me; if the latter, either remove Jefferson and Madison or rename the column.
 * John Gibson presumably wasn't appointed by "Acting-Governor", he was the Acting Governor. The best solution would be to create another column titled "notes" and put that note there.
 * John Gibson (Indiana) says that Mr. Gibson "served twice as acting governor of the territory." If this is correct, should it be reflected in the table?
 * "Legislature" section looks fine. Should either Indiana Senate and Indiana House of Representatives or just Indiana General Assembly be linked somewhere?
 * Delegate (United States Congress) should be linked in the "Congressional delegation" section.
 * Does the congressional delegation table need to be sortable? If so, use sort to make it sort by surnames and years rather than first names and months, and apply the same standards to the Governors table.
 * Quite a few issues with the tables under "Other high officials":
 * The tables really don't need to be sortable.
 * There's no need for empty notes sections.
 * Delink the dates in the Secretary table.
 * Knox County, Indiana, Vincennes, Indiana, Corydon, Indiana, and Davis Floyd all only need to be linked in their first occurence.
 * If most of these people are notable enough for articles, the others should be, and should be redlinks.
 * The Secretary table can use Party shading/Democratic-Republican
 * Finally, you could set widths for the columns so they have a uniform total width. That's just a minor presentation thing though.
 * History:
 * Native American could link to Native Americans in the United States.
 * "U.S. army" needs a capital "A".
 * "St. Clair's defeat is the worst defeat of the U.S. army by Native Americans in history." should be "St. Clair's defeat in the Battle of the Wabash is..."
 * The link to Anthony Wayne should probably just read "Anthony Wayne". Alternatively, link the whole phrase "General "Mad Anthony" Wayne".
 * File:Treaty of Greenville.jpg could be bigger; it's difficult to see the details.
 * I might just be getting lazy at this point, but the "Formation" and "District of Louisiana" sections look pretty much perfect.
 * Tecumseh's War:
 * Tecumseh's Confederacy shouldn't be piped at the end of the first paragraph. Consider "a confederation with which to battle the Americans. (See Tecumseh's Confederacy)"
 * War of 1812:
 * File:Indiana Territory 1812.jpg could be included. It should also be vectorised and the colours and "Fort Detriot" typo fixed, and you might want to check that the map is fully comprehensive.
 * Statehood
 * Replace Congress with House of Representatives.
 * Is there any reason the title of ref #43 is in italics?
 * See also
 * Indiana is linked in the text and not needed in the see also section.
 * References / Sources
 * ...should be merged. You want something like: