Federalist No. 2 has been listed as one of the Language and literature 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: August 2, 2023. (Reviewed version).

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

Law High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. United States High‑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 High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Books This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the relevant guideline for the type of work.BooksWikipedia:WikiProject BooksTemplate:WikiProject BooksBook articles

I am perplexed about the fact that the content does not address what the title promises to deliver. The title promises to talk about the dangers from the foreign force and influence. Only one sentence mentions security that only a union government could provide to protect it as well as the "confederacies". The paper only argues for having a federal government which needs the constitution as a basic framework to operate. 173.76.235.84 (talk) 23:13, 21 February 2015 (UTC)Hartmut, 21 February 2015[reply]

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Mattweiss.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 10:02, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Federalist No. 2/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: AryKun (talk · contribs) 15:22, 31 July 2023 (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

• Will do. AryKun (talk) 15:22, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Loyalist and Constitutional Convention are duplinked in the body.
• "economics, however, arguing" However is redundant.
• "states have since worked" and "that have formed" shouldn't this be "states had since worked" and "that had formed"?
• "Federalist Papers that the people" would be better as "Federalist Papers: that the people"
• "government after being created in the midst of a war, but that the" doesn't really make sense, change it to "government as they had been created in the midst of a war, and that the"
• Founding Fathers is linked at second mention
• "and No. 5 that continued" would be better as "and No. 5, which all continued"
• The summary is accurate as far as I can see after reading the original text.
• Images are properly licensed and used. However, the body seems a bit text-heavy; maybe you could incorporate an image in there somewhere?
• References are all to reliable sources and formatted correctly.
• Spotchecks:
  • Ferguson, Robert A. (1999). "The Forgotten Publius: John Jay and the Aesthetics of Ratification". Early American Literature. Verifies all claims made.
  • Stockton, Constant Noble (1971). "Are There Natural Rights in "The Federalist"?". Ethics. Verifies all claims made.
  • "Federalist Papers: Primary Documents in American History". Library of Congress. and "Federalist Essays in Historic Newspapers". Library of Congress. verify all claims made.
• That's all I have. AryKun (talk) 10:43, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • AryKun I've made all of the fixes listed above. I agree that more images would be good, and I'll probably try to incorporate them in other Federalist Papers articles. For this one I went with an image of the Constitutional Convention. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 20:36, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Okay, will be passing now. AryKun (talk) 08:51, 2 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]