Talk:William Burnham Woods/GA1

GA Review

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

Nominator: Extraordinary Writ (talk · contribs)08:30, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

Reviewer: Irruptive Creditor (talk · contribs) 23:00, 30 March 2024 (UTC)

Failed "good article" nomination

This article has failed its Good article nomination. Reasoning:

1. This page is aptly described as start class on Wikipedia, and my opinion, this assessment is still entirely accurate. There exists little on this page about the Associate Justice himself.
2. It never really mentions the wider impact of the post-bellum Supreme Court in shaping the interpretation of the 14th and 15th amendments.
3. The discussion on the Civil Rights Cases (1883) and Slaughterhouse Cases (1873) are lacking any depth about how those two decisions absolutely eviscerated the 14th Amendment's promise of equality under the law, leading to decades of setbacks until the 1960s Civil Rights Movement.
4. Fails to put the Privileges or Immunities Clause's original meaning and intended purpose (incorporating the Bill of Rights against the states) in contrast with the post-bellum court's narrow interpretation, or how this closed off avenue for incorporation would lead to the broadening of the Due Process Clause through substantive due process.
5. Overall, it has a long, long way to go before it even approaches so much as B-class on Wikipedia.

When these issues are addressed, the article can be renominated. If you feel that this review is in error, feel free to have it reassessed. Thank you for your work so far.

This is a curious review, and I do not think it really comports with the GA criteria (among other things). But I will try to address the actionable suggestions before I renominate at some point down the road. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 07:33, 1 April 2024 (UTC)