Juicebox244

Bio:

Aspiring Mech Tech form the PACNW, thoroughly enjoys the outdoors doing backpacking, camping, hiking, and bombing trails in my truck.

I'm an avid lover of history, listening to many history podcasts as well as a multitude of books. I also enjoy reading science fiction and playing video games.

I love using Wikipedia to read up on historical places I visit and the stories behind them, like Fort Hancock, New Jersey, part of a huge coastal defense system developed in the late 19th- early 20th century.

Article Critique:

After visiting Fort Hancock, New Jersey this past summer I was surprised at the highly detailed and the thorough Wikipedia page it had. I enjoyed reading the details of the past and looking at the remains in the present. I really like doing that, reading about the past and visiting the site where it happened. Walking where people walked 100 years ago, but they were doing something, not just anything, but freaking out about U-boats and firing on friendly merchant ships, to name a few examples. And looking at the Wikipedia page, I was surprised at how much care has gone into making it perfect.

Citations

For such a simple article it is remarkably well cited, with nearly every major fact cited in article. The citations are incredibly detailed as well, stating what pages in the book cited to find the information. There are several small facts that remain uncited, mostly due to that information being found in the park itself. The article has a healthy assortment of external links, which are also cited multiple times. A few of the cited links are dead, but the majority are from books.

Grammatical

The article is incredibly well groomed of grammatical and spelling errors. Looking into the history of edits, there are many small edits focusing on the grammar and layout of the article.

Completeness

The article is very well fleshed out, it has most if not all of the information conveyed at the site, as well as from all the research books on the subject. I do think it would be useful to have testimony of the people who lived and worked there, if there is any one of them left, or testimony exists in the first place. Another thing to include is pictures used on the placards at the site would be a welcome addition to the page, as visuals can help create a mental image of what it was like "back in the day"

Summary

Overall, I think this page deserves a very good rating. The intense citation and inclusion of numerous external sources help this article to be factual and an accurate source of information. It is a good article to start "going down rabbit holes" on, as there are so many links to interesting and relevant things. I know I got sucked into this article and all the connecting articles for hours, ending up looking into the similar era coastal defenses in my own area. As a hobbyist of history, I would gladly read articles built like this one to find out more about the past.