Wikipedia:Peer review/Workhouse/archive1

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I recognise that this isn't yet the finished article, but I think it's been developed to a point where the views of uninvolved editors may be helpful. I've agonised over this for God knows how long, and without the help of Parrot of Doom it would still be languishing

Thanks for taking a look. Malleus Fatuorum 00:19, 13 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Lede needs to describe the decline to set the period? Is there any major historiographical debate that has occurred over workhouses? "In certain parts of the country there was a good deal of resistance to these new buildings, some of it violent, particularly in the industrial north." expand? Chartism? Incidenaryism? Captain Swing? Hasn't a great deal of political analysis occurred over the relief system? I'm not reading this in the narrative of the system? Apart from the one wife selling incident, sexuality isn't developed well yet... sexual segregation of the able bodied in the Kempthorne plan and general imposition of middle class sexual values on the poor? Does child transportation need to be expanded? The meaning and context of the discipline in education and discipline isn't obvious unless you're historically trained—regulation of personal conduct. Religion isn't adequately covered, isn't this post Catholic emancipation, forced Anglicanism? Dissenters? Has any scholar compared the benefits of being indigent in the late poor law medical and educational situation to the benefits claimed of indigency today in the UK? I love the media, the quotes are a perfect example of how to use primary sources as "media" rather than as evidence. Well done. In summary: missing historiography, minor context issues, great article. I hope these comments help you develop the article. Fifelfoo (talk) 07:08, 13 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your helpful comments. The lead is entirely inadequate I know, but we thought we'd leave that until the rest of the article was in good shape. Malleus Fatuorum 13:29, 13 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
See, I told you it needed more about religion :P Parrot of Doom 22:21, 14 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'm afraid that I've got a bit of a blind spot where religion is concerned, but if you both think so then I'll have to defer to you. Malleus Fatuorum 22:38, 14 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Brief comments from Nikkimaria