Talk:Black Monday (1987)/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Cerebellum (talk · contribs) 01:31, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

Good Article review progress box

Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV () 3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant () Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

• Lead: There is some information that is in the lead but not the body, such as that the Dow fell 508 points. This info should be repeated in the body.
• Extent of the crash: List of largest daily changes in the Dow Jones Industrial Average indicates that the crash was the largest percentage drop in a single day in the exchange's history, but this article says "This was one of the largest one-day percentage drops." If it was really the largest, I recommend mentioning that in the article.
• Aftermath: You cover the regulatory changes due to the crash, could you add something on the long-term impact? Did the market recover immediately or was there lasting economic damage?
• Worldwide view: The article focuses on the US, which I think is acceptable since the crash started there. We don't need a section for every country but I think some kind of "other countries" or "worldwide impact" section would be appropriate. The lead says that Hong Kong, Singapore, and Australia's markets fell 40%, but I didn't see that info in the article body. Would be interested to hear why those countries were hit so hard.
• References: Referencing is thorough, but please add a source for the first paragraph of "background", I tend to think that GA's should have at least one citation per paragraph.
• Spot checks: Checked references #4, 32, 74. Information checks out.
• Images: Appropriate graphs and a timeline are included, I don't think you need anything else.
• External links: I couldn't get the "CBC Reports on Black Monday" external link to work.

The information you have is presented lucidly and comprehensively, I just think the article needs to be expanded a bit to cover the aftermath and world-wide impact. I'll place the article on hold for seven days. --Cerebellum (talk) 01:18, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

No change after seven days, unfortunately I'll have to fail the article. Please renominate when ready! --Cerebellum (talk) 03:02, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

Additional comments

Two specific comments about the lead and a more general comment echoing above.

• reverse images in the lede, DJIA at top, since FTSE not mentioned.
• "The Reserve Bank of New Zealand's refusal to loosen monetary policy in response to the crisis, however, had sharply negative and relatively long-term consequences for both financial markets and the real economy." I presume this is in reference to the country on its own, but the current phrasing and context is ambiguous, should be clarified by replacing "both" with "the country's" and dropping "the" before "real economy".
• General: There's a great deal of US microeconomic focus to the article, but it lacks a larger macroeconomic picture. Given how much of the background to Black Monday lay in issues related to currency markets and interest rates, it seems to me a great absence that neither the Plaza nor Lourve Accords are discussed. Using Shiller's 1988 work in the background is dated and suffers from recentism. Most economic history points to the toxic mix of US deficit spending from the early 1980s, over-valued dollar (to the Plaza accord), trade deficits with Japan and West Germany, rising interest rates and tight money supply. Lourve accord starts to unravel when Germany moves to lift rates, US asset managers see a combination in the threat of a falling dollar, rising US interest rates and continuing rise in the trade deficit and run! There's also no sense of probably the most significant larger marcoeconomic consequence of Black Monday: the end of (US-led) attempts at international currency coordination.

Regards, --Goldsztajn (talk) 20:21, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

For what it's worth, Martin Feldstein saying more or less the same thing 30+ years before I did and Soros' version out of interest.

References

--Goldsztajn (talk) 07:46, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for the additional comments! --Cerebellum (talk) 03:02, 16 May 2020 (UTC)