Talk:2016 Jim Beam strike

2016 Jim Beam strike 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: December 28, 2021. (Reviewed version).

A fact from 2016 Jim Beam strike appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 12 January 2022 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that the 2016 Jim Beam strike was the first labor strike in the company's history?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2022/January. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/2016 Jim Beam strike.

Wikipedia

Organized Labour Low‑importance

	Organized Labour portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Organized Labour, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Organized Labour 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.Organized LabourWikipedia:WikiProject Organized LabourTemplate:WikiProject Organized Labourorganized labour articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

United States: Kentucky / Louisville Low‑importance

	United States portal 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.
	Kentucky portal This article is supported by WikiProject Kentucky (assessed as Low-importance).
	Kentucky portal This article is supported by WikiProject Louisville (assessed as Low-importance).

Spirits Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Spirits, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Spirits or Distilled beverages 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.SpiritsWikipedia:WikiProject SpiritsTemplate:WikiProject SpiritsSpirits articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Spirits WikiProject task list:

This list is transcluded from the tasks page, to edit it click here.

Here are some tasks you can do for WikiProject Spirits:

Tagging all articles that fall under our scope with {{WikiProject Spirits}} and assessing their quality and importance to the project.

Business Low‑importance

	Business portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Business, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of business articles 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.BusinessWikipedia:WikiProject BusinessTemplate:WikiProject BusinessWikiProject Business articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Brands Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Brands, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of brands 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.BrandsWikipedia:WikiProject BrandsTemplate:WikiProject BrandsBrands articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:2016 Jim Beam strike/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: GhostRiver (talk · contribs) 23:19, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'll be taking a look at this! — Ghost River 23:19, 4 December 2021 (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

Delink Kentucky per MOS:OVERLINK
- Done.
Missing "included" or a synonym after The primary concerns of the members involved,
- Done.
"distilleries were reporting" → "distilleries reported"
- Done.
Comma after "resumed on October 18"
- Done.
De-quote "contingency plan" per MOS:QUOTEPOV and per the fact it is not in quotes in the body
- Done.

Background

Delink "Kentucky" per above
- Done.
No comma after "from large alcohol companies"
- Done.
"at their facilities in Clermont and Boston, Kentucky"
- Done.
"was trying to get" → "wanted"
- Done.
"would not cause any noticeable shortage," → "would not have a significant effect on product availability,"
- Done.
Then link "shortage" in "could cause shortages"
- Done.
"about 5" → "about five" per MOS:NUMERAL
- Done.

Course of the strike

Comma after "in Loretto, Kentucky" per MOS:GEOCOMMA
- Done.
"On October 21," → "The next day,"
- Done.
"was in general successful" → "was a general success"
- Done.

References

Add "|url-access=limited" to anything from The Courier-Journal
- Done.
A couple unreliable sources used, but the Post uses an expert, and the "World Socialist Web Site" is used for uncontroversial facts

General comments

Photo used is relevant and available for use
No stability concerns in the revision history
Earwig's copyvio tool is not working for me at the moment, so I am assuming good faith based on previous GA reviews and some spot checks
This is a general question more than anything. Your strike articles often include some section on long-term impact; it has been five years since the Jim Beam strike, so are there any more developments we can pull from that? I wouldn't include the 2019 warehouse fire, since that was an act of God, which is why I am asking in curiosity.
- Unfortunately, I was not able to find much information on the long-term impact of the strike from any reliable sources, but if I do, I will be sure to update the article accordingly.

Thank you for your patience. Putting on hold now. — Ghost River 17:19, 18 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

GhostRiver, I just wanted to reach out and say that I have made some edits to the article addressing the comments in your review. Thank you again for beginning this review, and if there are any further comments, questions, or concerns, please feel free to reach out. -JJonahJackalope (talk) 18:35, 18 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No worries on the long-term impact; you can't be expected to include information that doesn't exist. Passing now. — Ghost River 15:35, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 15:15, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(

Comment or view
Article history

)

... that the 2016 Jim Beam strike was the first labor strike in the company's history? Source: source
- Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Crackhead Barney

Improved to Good Article status by JJonahJackalope (talk). Self-nominated at 13:51, 30 December 2021 (UTC).[reply]

Hi JJonahJackalope, review follows: article promoted to GA on 28 December; article is cited inline throughout to what look to be reliable sources; I didn't find any issue with overly close paraphrasing; hook fact is interesting, mentioned in the article and checks out to source cited; a QPQ has been carried out. Looks fine to me. One query, the background section notes that new employees were on $17.22 and then the "Course of the strike" section states "there would no longer be a two-tier wage system with some employees earning $17.22 per hour". I initially read that as some employees would now earn $17.22 an hour, but I guess it means that new employees would no longer be on the lower rate? Is there a way to clarify this? - Dumelow (talk) 17:56, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Dumelow, thanks for beginning this DYK review, I've made a slight edit to that section to clarify. -JJonahJackalope (talk) 03:09, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks JJonahJackalope, all good - Dumelow (talk) 07:40, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Promoting the main hook to Prep 1 – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 15:15, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]