Talk:Conscription Crisis of 1918

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Military history: British / European / World War I This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status: Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met Associated task forces: /  British military history task force European military history task force World War I task force Ireland Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ireland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Ireland on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IrelandWikipedia:WikiProject IrelandTemplate:WikiProject IrelandIreland articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. This article has been marked as needing an infobox. Politics of the United Kingdom Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Politics of the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Politics of the United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomPolitics of the United Kingdom articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Anti-war Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Anti-war, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the anti-war movement on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Anti-warWikipedia:WikiProject Anti-warTemplate:WikiProject Anti-warAnti-war articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

	Conscription Crisis of 1918 was a good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones Date Process Result March 26, 2008 Good article nominee Not listed

Shouldn't the Yeats and Lady Gregory quotes, already mentioned in the Conscription article, also be included here?--Silverback 18:27, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Good point - done Guliolopez 18:51, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

This article covers an interesting area, of importance in the history of Anglo-Irish relations and in World War I history. Unfortunately the article is not yet of GA standard, for the following reasons:-

• The prose style is problematic. Much of the article is in one-sentence paragraphs, which means that it does not flow easily for the reader. Moreover some of the sentences are very clumsily constructed. Two examples: first, the sentence in the "Plot" section that begins "The Hay Plan was conceived..."; second, the sentence forming the first paragraph of the "After effects" section. There are other instances of the same awkward prose. A thorough revision is necessary before the article can be considered GA.
• The article has structural weaknesses. The lead must be expanded to become a proper summary of the whole article, not just an introduction to the topic. The "After effects" section, which I suggest is renamed "Consequences", needs to be more clearly written, with references - it has none at present. The "Notes" section shouldn't be there at all - either incorporate these facts in the main text or use them as footnotes. The "Contemporaneous quotes" would also be better within the text.
• The article has referencing problems. There are too few in-text citations, and of those that you have about half are cited to whole books rather than pages. Some sections have few or no references at all. The organisation of references would also be clearer if you used the Harvard referencing format together with a list of sources.
• The article is a bit weak on images. You have done well to get photographs of some of the fairly obscure politicians that you show, but the article would be much improved with more images further down. At Commons there are lots of photographs of Lloyd George, one or two of Viceroy French (try Sir John French.jpg) and loads of Dublin Castle shots. If you have a good trawl in Commons you may find all sorts of treasures.

Above are the main issues that I have with the article, which are all surmountable given time and patience, and I would be delighted to see a revised version of the article back at GAN. I would strongly advise, however, that you change the title to something like "Irish conscription crisis 1918". There are other Wikipedia articles called Conscription crisis of 1917 and Conscription Crisis of 1944, and you need to be distinct from these.

I will shortly post a list of smaller editorial points, which may be of use if you decide to revise the article. If you do decide, I'll be happy to give you further help.

To summarise, against the Good article criteria:-

• Well-written: Fail
• Factually accurate and properly referenced: Fail (accurate but not adequately referenced)
• Breadth of coverage: Pass
• NPOV: Pass
• Stable: Pass
• Images: So-so, needs improving.

Brianboulton (talk) 21:18, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Background

• "short of troops" better than "short on troops", perhaps? [GL] - OK - Done
• Year date 1918 should not be linked [GL] - OK - Done
• Should "Irish Party" be "Irish parliamentary parties" - there was more than one in 1918, I think? [GL] - Actually, as you will see in the IPP page, the IPP was one party, and was commonly called the "Irish Party". That said, I have spelled it out for clarity. And have also spelled out what is meant by the "Irish parties" lower down.
• Outbreak of war should be specified to 1914 [GL] - OK - Done
• Likewise, Home Rule Act specify to 1914 [GL] - OK - Done
• The sentence beginning "Though large numbers..." is overlong and difficult to understand. Try to simplify it [GL] - OK - Have split it in two. Will have another look at it as part of broader language review.
• "Autonomous" is wrong word in last sentence. The sense you want is "peculiar to"; autonomous means "self-governing" [GL] - Agreed - Another editor actually added that sentence. I've never been sure about it myself, but didn't want to overly strong in rewording. Have reworded slightly to address point.

The Conference...

• Second para of section would be better beginning:"On the evening of the same day..." [GL] - OK - Done
• "annual meeting" in lower case sounds a bit informal - what was the status of this meeting? [GL] - Not sure what to do with this. The "annual meeting" is just that. It doesn't have a massively formal title, standing agenda or any pomp surrounding it. I'm not sure it's appropriate to spend too long explaining it in this article.
• not necessary to link "church" [GL] - OK - Done

Strike and other actions

• not necessary to link "rallies" [GL] - To be honest, I'm not sure I agree. Not everyone will know what a "rally" is. Will consider however.
• nationwide is one word [GL] - OK - Done
• You should combine the first two sentences of para 2, as: "....start of May, where John Dillon..." [GL] - OK - Done
• You say that Dillon's party and Sinn Fein "had previously been divided" on the best method of devolution from UK. Surely they were still divided on this issue in 1918, even if united on the conscription question? And: "would subsequently be divided on the Anglo-Irish Treaty of 1921"? Hadn't Dillon's party ceased to exist by 1921? [GL] - I'll have a think about this as part of the broader language/structural review.
• "Immediately following....." - following what? [GL] - OK - Clarified

The Plot

• "undertook several initiatives" is a bit of a feeble description of coercive policies [GL] - Not sure about this. Want to avoid using POV terms or anything which suggests a partisan view of any of it. Will consider.
• Lord French didn't arrest 73 leaders, he "ordered the arrest of.." [GL] - OK - Clarified
• The term "Dublin Castle authorities" doesn't mean anything to the uninitiated. You need to explain that it refers to the British authorities in Dublin [GL] - OK - Will consider how best to reword to make this clear
• the lack of evidence better than a lack. German Plot should be capitalised, without quote marks [GL] - Not sure I agree with the "'the lack', versus 'a lack' comment. Have made the other change.
• "aggravated" is the wrong word here. The sense you want is that anti-British opinion hardened, and Sinn Fein support increased. "Aggravated" doesn't provide this sense [GL] - Will consider this
• Can you give Northcliff's exact post? I think he was Director of Propaganda, or something like that [GL] - At the time he was "Director of Propaganda in Enemy Countries", but this "plan" was extra-official, so I'm not sure it's relevant. And may give the wrong impression. Will consider.
• Catholic Church needs two capital Cs [GL] - OK - Done
• "Empathy among Irish Catholics for the German occupation...."? Need to reword to indicate empathy for the occupied countries [GL] - Very good point. Have corrected
• You need to explain who Edward Shortt was, rather than relying on a link [GL] - OK - Done
• Sounds as if the Hay "Plan" was simply a letter. Why did Hay have to write it and then get it approved by Shortt? Why couldn't Shortt have written it himself? [GL] - Because it was a bureacratic, diplomatic and political minefield. Hence "crisis" :) Will consider if there is any way of clarifying.
• "stymied" is slang. "Thwarted", perhaps? [GL] - Not sure I agree. Will consider this.
• Use of abbreviation "WW1" not advisable, and not necessary to say armistice "effectively" ended it - I'd omit the bracketed part. [GL] - OK - Have partially updated. Will review as part of broaderer re-work.

I hope these points will help in the re-writing. Brianboulton (talk) 22:31, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your comments Brian. I'll review and see if/how your points might be addressed. Much appreciated. Guliolopez (talk) 14:12, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Initial changes/responses as noted above. Starting with low-hanging fruit. Will consider some of the broader points (long sentences, extended intro, etc) for re-dress also. Guliolopez (talk) 15:11, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Glad to see a swift and positive response. Leave a note on my talk page when you want me to look again. Brianboulton (talk) 23:53, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed the following paragraph, which had been commented-out at the foot of the "The Conferences and pledge" section:

(Commented-out text begins)

Supporters of the pledge further called on all Irish to protect those who were liable for active service from being arrested when refusing to enlist, and offering them shelter and food "according to their ability". Further, if any man were to be arrested, he should claim conscientious objector status, and to deny the "validity of the conscription law as applied to Ireland".

(Commented-out text ends)

Andrew Gwilliam (talk) 23:28, 25 August 2011 (UTC).[reply]