1966 Dayton race riot has been listed as one of the History good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. Review: March 22, 2022. ( Reviewed version).

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

African diaspora Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject African diaspora, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of African diaspora 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.African diasporaWikipedia:WikiProject African diasporaTemplate:WikiProject African diasporaAfrican diaspora articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. United States: Ohio Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Ohio (assessed as Low-importance).

This review is transcluded from Talk:1966 Dayton race riot/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: GhostRiver ( talk · contribs) 17:47, 15 March 2022 (UTC) reply

Hello! I'll be reviewing this article to help reduce the good article nomination backlog and to gain points in the WP:WIKICUP. Although quid pro quo is not required, if you fancy returning the favor, I have a list of articles in need of review here. — Ghost River 17:47, 15 March 2022 (UTC) reply

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

Infobox and lede

• "Through the 1900s" → "Through the 20th century"
  • Done.
• The quote from the Dayton Daily News should be linked in the lede
  • Done.
• Link "drive-by" to drive-by shooting
  • Done, slightly rephrased that section.
• "it had been a white assailant" → "the assailant had been white"
  • Done.
• "either not reopening or relocating elsewhere" → "either relocating or remaining closed" (as an aside, "relocating elsewhere" is redundant, because one cannot relocate in the same place)
  • Done.
• "Additionally ... additional race riots" cut one for redundancy
  • Done.
• "former Dayton Mayor" → "former Dayton mayor"; "mayor" here is a descriptor more than a title
  • Done.
• "punished" should have a link to it for MOS:QUOTEPOV reasons
  • Done.
• "Dayton is among" → "Dayton remains among", as earlier para shows that this is ongoing and not new
  • Done.

Background

• I'd cut all of "was a period that" in the first sentence, as the verbiage is slightly redundant and would also eliminate some subject/verb tension
  • Done.
• More s/v issues with "Watts riots" (plural) "is regarded as one" (singular)
  • Fixed.
• "some white residents of Madison Township (a suburb of Dayton)" → "some white residence of the Madison Township suburb"
  • Done.
• Specify time zone for "3 a.m."
  • Done.
• Delink "bar" per MOS:OVERLINK
  • Done.
• "hospital and shortly thereafter died" → "hospital, where he died from his injuries"
  • Done.
• though it was unsure phrasing here makes it sound like you're referring to the singular eyewitness as an "it"
  • Fixed.

Riot

• Why did the investigation claim a drive-by was impossible?
  • Unsure, source does not give a reason for the conclusion reached by the investigation and unfortunately doesn't give too much information on the investigation as a whole.
• "rioters through projectiles" → "rioters threw projectiles"
  • Fixed.

Aftermath

• In the immediate aftermath of the rioting, one death and 30 injuries. Sentence fragment
  • Fixed.
• "on the total number" → "on the exact number" to reduce repetition
  • Done.
• Should you include current dollar values for those estimates?
  • Done.
• "to have had the National Guard called in" → "to result in the National Guard being called"
  • Done.
• Don't need to specify who C. J. McLin is, as he was mentioned earlier
• Done.

References / Sources

• Good

General comments

• No images, thus those criteria cannot be assessed
• No stability concerns in the revision history
• Earwig score is inflated due to the direct quote, actual content looks good

Putting on hold for now. As always, feel free to ping me with questions, and please let me know when you're finished! — Ghost River 21:14, 20 March 2022 (UTC) reply

GhostRiver, just made some edits addressing your GA review here. Thanks for starting the review, and if you have any further questions, comments, or concerns, please reach out. Thanks, JJonahJackalope ( talk) 22:33, 20 March 2022 (UTC) reply

Thank you for making those changes! Shame that the article doesn't mention why a drive-by shooting would be impossible, but if it's not out there, it can't be asked of you. Passing now. — Ghost River 22:06, 22 March 2022 (UTC) reply