I want to stress that this crit isn't finished. As soon as I do finish it, I will update this post and ping you over Discord. However, I know you wanted this page out there ASAP, and so do I, so here's what I have so far:
This is a beautiful article, Pierson. Lovely CSS work, great utilization of images, not to mention well-written. I've always liked reading these articles about the inner workings of the Authority, and this is no exception. Five stars out of five.
I have a few suggestions (based on my subjective opinion) that I think would improve the aesthetic of this page. Take them or leave them, it's up to you.
Subjective general critique
Quotebox font size
I think the font size you used for the orange quoteboxes at the beginning of each Operational Districts section is a little too small, which makes it kind of strenuous to read without zooming in. I made a mockup that has the body text size bumped up to 95% and the signature bumped up to 100% size (under "Proposed formatting") so you can decide for yourself:
Then again, it's not that much of an issue… maybe I just need contacts?
Collapsible formatting (bracketing)
I noticed that for your collapsibles, you format them like this:
I prefer putting brackets around my plus/minus signs. I think it makes them look cleaner.
Completely up to you, though. It's just a personal aesthetic preference.
Collapsible formatting (hide="- Close")
This is a ridiculously specific nitpick, so just bear with me here.
When I click on one of the collapsibles in your article, the "hide" text changes to "- Close." It's a little annoying, especially for the longer ones like the "Dissolution of the Central America Command" collapsible, because the text changes size and I have to move my cursor a few pixels to the left to close it. Observe:
Compare that to:
The latter example is just ever so slightly more convenient.
Now, onto the rest of the article.
Overview
Smaller sub-regions within the established regional commands are referred to as "operational districts" (OpDis).
- Dehyphenate "sub-regions." It's a closed compound word, not a hyphenated compound word.
- "Smaller subregions" is redundant - a subregion is by definition smaller than a region. I would replace "smaller" with "strategically important", as this lends some clarification as to why the Authority divides the regional commands into operational districts.
- Change "the established regional commands" to "the Authority's established regional commands." Grammatically speaking, it should be made clear who the regional commands belong to, even if the answer is obvious.
In an effort to prevent future nationalization of Authority institutes, these sub-regions were established as part of the organization's reforms.
I was making a ton of bullet point suggestions here, but I eventually decided it would just be easier to rewrite this sentence entirely (edit: 1/30/2023: I hope that isn't too much of an annoyance! This did miff DoubleDenial a bit, so I'll likely go back and bullet point it later). Change it to:
These operational districts were formally established in 1946 as part of the Authority's post-war organizational reforms, in an effort to safeguard regional branches of the Authority from becoming nationalized by hostile powers in the future.
The new sentence:
- Provides a date for when these operational districts were established.
- Provides a precedent for nationalization of Authority regional branches (GARD).
- Changes the awkward "Authority institutes" to "regional branches of the Authority."
- Changes "sub-regions" to "operational districts", keeping the sentence on track with the rest of this page's theme.
- Crosslinks to the GARD hub.
Various operational districts within a regional command are led by Regional Directors who are appointed by their respective regional representative.
- Change "various" to "the various."
- Change "within a" to "within any given."
- Change "are led" to "are each led."
- Change "by Regional Directors" to "a Regional Director."
- Add a comma after "Director."
- Change "who are" to "who is."
- Change "appointed by" to "appointed to their post by."
- Who is their "respective regional representative?" Is it their regional command's designated Global Director? Elaborate.
Since 1954, the number of operational districts within a regional command has decreased steadily; the last expansion was authorized back in late 1996.
- Change "the number of" to "the formation of new."
- Remove "within a regional command," as the operational districts are by definition within a regional command.
- I would say "slowed considerably" rather than "decreased steadily", since the sentence seems to indicate that new operational districts are still being created on rare occasions.
- Replace the semicolon with a comma.
" Replace "the last expansion was authorized back" with "with the most recent expansion being authorized."
While regional representatives have the power to add further districts,
- Say "establish new operational districts" instead of "add further districts."
Operational Districts
Considered the 'heart' of the modern Authority apparatus,
- Change "Considered the" to "Widely considered to be."
- Remove the singular quotation marks around "heart."
- "Apparatus" is a strange descriptor. It's not wrong, technically speaking… but there's better words for it. Maybe change "modern Authority apparatus" to "the modern Authority's global network."
Northern Command the third oldest regional command,
- Add an "is" after Command.
- "third oldest" should be hyphenated.
having begun prior to the current regional system as the 'Auctoritas New World Interest Group,' predating even Columbus' arrival in the Americas.
- Change "begun" to "become established."
- Put 'Auctoritas New World Interest Group' in double quotation marks.
- Change "predating even" to "even predating."
- Change "Columbus' arrival in the Americas" to "the first voyage of Christopher Columbus."
- How many years did the Auctoritas New World Interest Group predate the Columbus expedition by? You should state this at the end of the sentence.
The Calamity of the 80s
[[collapsible show="[+] The Union Strikes (1979-1980) critique" hide="[-] The Union Strikes (1979-1980) critique"]]
- You should change the name of this section to avoid confusion with the GOI of the same name. (I know this will sound kind of dumb, but before I clicked on the collapsible, that's what I thought this section was going to be about.) My suggestion is "Formation of the IURPDW labor union and subsequent strike (1979-1980)" for the collapsible, and then "1980 IURPDW labor strike" for the section header.
- So what the hell is an IURPDW, you may ask? Well, the "Worker's Union" is an unrealistically generic name for a labor union. Take a look at the list of labor unions in the United States, for instance: we've got names like the "International Union of Elevator Constructors (IUEC)," the "Amalgamated Transit Union (ATU)," and the "National Football League Players Association (NFLPA)." In each case, the name of the labor union specifies who it caters to (elevator constructors, football players, etc.), and also has a flashy acronym to go along with it. IURPDW would be the acronym for the "International Union of Research & Protection Division Workers", which I believe you'll find sound more realistic.
- Change the title of the collapsible to "The dissolution of Central America Command [CENTCOM] (1980)".