Talk:Mooning the Cog

Mooning the Cog was a Social sciences and society good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
May 3, 2008	Good article nominee	Not listed

United States: New Hampshire / New Hampshire Mountains 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.
	New Hampshire portal This article is supported by WikiProject New Hampshire (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject New Hampshire Mountains (assessed as Mid-importance).

Backpacking Stub‑class (inactive)

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Backpacking, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.BackpackingWikipedia:WikiProject BackpackingTemplate:WikiProject BackpackingBackpacking articles
Stub	This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.

GA Review May 3 2008[edit]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Is it reasonably well written?
A. Prose quality:
Some sentances, particularly this one: "It is a twenty- to thirty-year-old tradition, in which as the train passes the trail, many hikers choose to drop their drawers, mooning the passengers" come off very awkward

B. MoS compliance:
I'm not a MoS expert, but this seems to be right.
Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
A. References to sources:

B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

C. No original research:
This is where it really fails. You have a total of 4 refs; one of those is a public radio site, and another is someone's personal blog. According to WP:SPS, neither of these are reliable sources.
Is it broad in its coverage?
A. Major aspects:

B. Focused:
Although it follows both of these, it is far to short to cover anything in depth.
Is it neutral?
Fair representation without bias:
Is it stable?
No edit wars, etc:
Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
Overall:
Pass or Fail:
Sorry, but this article is both too short, and doesn't site enough reliable resources. Due to the amount of work remaining, I must fail it.

Spinach Dip 02:34, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Removed photograph.[edit]

I removed the image of the man holding up the citation he received as his full name, address and date of birth, as well as the officer's name is clearly listed on the citation. I am unsure if the original uploader is the individual pictured - it doesn't say on the photograph's upload page. If it is, and he wishes to have this information public, then I see no problem. However, the police officer's name and badge number are clearly listed as well. ExRat (talk) 18:37, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That is a public photo. Under what wiki rule are you removing it? Tmaull (talk) 18:11, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re-removed it per WP:IUP Section 11.3 Moral issues "No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. The subject's name, address, phone, even part of his social security number is visible, as well as previously stated before, the officer's Name and ID number. The image is now also off of Flickr. Cheers, Mazeau (talk) 23:03, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It says that an off-duty state trooper began riding the cog with a Forrest ranger. If the trooper was riding the train for the purpose of arresting the "mooners", how would that classify as off-duty? Parcanman (talk) 02:24, 23 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]