Talk:Chris Lu/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

My comments will trickle in a few lines at a time. Respond to each line separately. I will strike lines as we progress.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 21:16, 17 February 2009 (UTC)


 * LEAD
 * Your opening sentency belies his title. Is he the secretary for the administration or the United States Cabinet?
 * His official title is Cabinet Secretary, which is a position in the administration. I added some wording to the first sentence to try to make it clearer that the position is part of the administration and not the Cabinet. Does this address the issue? --Hunter Kahn (talk) 00:17, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
 * attended the same time as Obama s/b attended at the same time as Obama.
 * The objection right after this one rendered this change moot. --Hunter Kahn (talk) 00:17, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Do you mean they were in the same class or that they overlapped by a year or two? I think you should say he was a classmate of Barack Obama to be clear.
 * Changed to your suggestion. --Hunter Kahn (talk) 00:17, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Washington, D.C. firm Sidley Austin s/b either the Washington, D.C. firm Sidley Austin or Washington, D.C.-based firm Sidley Austin
 * I went with the former. --Hunter Kahn (talk) 00:17, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Although the lead is heavily linked, you might want to link Barack Obama's U.S. Senate to United States Senate career of Barack Obama.
 * Done. --Hunter Kahn (talk) 00:17, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
 * one of the highest-ranking Asian Americans in the administration: Be concrete here or it is meaningless. Is he the highest, 2nd highest, 3rd highest? --TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 21:31, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I simply don't know the answer to this; I based it on a statement from the New York Times source. In an attempt to address this issue, I used an actual quote from the NYT in my lead, and cited it accordingly. Does this address the issue? Let me know. --Hunter Kahn (talk) 00:17, 18 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Early life
 * Use the state of birth in the infobox too.
 * Done. --Hunter Kahn (talk) 06:05, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Use city-state for Rockville.
 * Done, if I'm understanding you correctly here. --Hunter Kahn (talk) 06:05, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I fixed it. Take a look at it.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 05:57, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
 * After MD I would add ",where he grew up." cited by the first ref.
 * Ok. Do I have to put in another citation from that first ref after the "where he grew up"? If you think so, feel free to add it yourself, or I'll do it. --Hunter Kahn (talk) 06:05, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
 * adding in 1974, made it ungrammatical unless he grew up in 1974. I fixed it.
 * Taiwan-Chinese?? I don't know what this means and it is linked in a meaningless way to me. Does it mean China born of Taiwan decent like African-American, Italia-American, etc. or does it mean "The Taiwan part of China" as it were?
 * Hmm...well, the "Taiwan-Chinese" thing was part of the article before I worked on it, so I kinda just left it be, as my source did seem to reflect it. The exact wording of the source is "Lu’s parents are Eileen and Chien-Yang Lu, both of whom were graduate students in the U.S. from Taiwan during the 1960’s." However, it says repeatedly that Chris Lu is a Chinese-American in the source. Maybe the best way to phrase it would be to say his parents were of Chinese dissent and were living in Taiwan? I'm not sure, what do you think? --Hunter Kahn (talk) 06:05, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
 * This is a PC issue I am unqualified to advise on. For GA we'll leave it be.
 * For the "Nationality" field of the infobox, I have changed it from "Taiwan-Chinese" to "United States". He was born in the US, so he has American citizenship.  I have left the "Early life" section as is, which states that Lu's parents are "Taiwan-Chinese".  But this will probably become problematic when the identity politics warriors discover that statement.  I see edit-warring over things like that all the time.  My suggestion here is to just say that his parents are from Taiwan, without applying an ethnic label.  Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 14:42, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I agree and made the change.--Hunter Kahn (talk) 18:23, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Ref two mentioned a wife. We should note he is married.
 * Interestingly enough, I did have a mention about Lu being married under a "Personal life" section and under the "Career" section, both of which had previously been removed from the article by a user identified only with an IP address. (Was that you? It happened recently.) They were removed because they were apparently "unverified," but as you'll see, they are in fact verified by the sources. I think they should stay in and I readded them (which I think deals with your objection too), but you're the reviewer. What do you think?--Hunter Kahn (talk) 06:05, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I think it is imperative that the info be included unless he has been divorced, separated, annulled, or widowed.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 05:57, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I agree, and it is now in the story. Hopefully it won't be removed again. --Hunter Kahn (talk) 17:46, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I think family of jurists is a bit misleading. His father was an engineer.[3] There is no information that his mother is ajurist. We only know of one. Add that his father was an engineer and reword.
 * I dropped the "family of jurists" thing. Also, I had actually had a reference to his father in here before, but that too was dropped by the IP address guy. I readded it, take a look... --Hunter Kahn (talk) 06:05, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
 * You should also mention his cum laude at Harvard. [5]--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 02:10, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Done. --Hunter Kahn (talk) 06:05, 18 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Career
 * You should make it clear that he worked at the DC office.
 * Done. --Hunter Kahn (talk) 17:46, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
 * The wording is a bit off with Obama also because it is a different office. Clean this up.
 * Better now? --Hunter Kahn (talk) 05:38, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Lu remained in the position until 2005. should follow the sentence about 2004 activities. You may have to reword.
 * I did some rewording, then I realized that it might work better at the beginning of the next section. I added it, let me know what you think. --Hunter Kahn (talk) 17:46, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes but footnotes need to follow punctuation.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 03:52, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Does it work after the comma like so? --Hunter Kahn (talk) 05:38, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
 * "Lu left his job at the Government Reform Committee in 2005"[6] is a problem now.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 22:55, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Quite right. Fixed it. --Hunter Kahn (talk) 03:00, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I keep seeing Katie. Where does Kathryn come from? --TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 06:15, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
 * She is listed as Kathryn here. I see that she is Katie in the other source, though. I'm more inclined to stick with Kathryn, but you're the reviewer. Which would you prefer we go with? --Hunter Kahn (talk) 17:46, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Kathryn is fine if we have a source.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 03:52, 21 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Senate Office
 * Everything else is in the past tense change would have to had.
 * Done. --Hunter Kahn (talk) 17:46, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
 * However, would be should be would have been.
 * OK. --Hunter Kahn (talk) 17:46, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Lu said of his role as legislative director.
 * Right you are. Added. --Hunter Kahn (talk) 17:46, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
 * During his time on Capitol Hill, Lu met Obama advisors and future White House staffers Pete Rouse and Phil Schiliro, both of whom he considers among his most influential mentors. has a lot of ambiguous pronouns.
 * Is it better now? --Hunter Kahn (talk) 17:46, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Did I miss the text supporting "laying the groundwork for a possible presidential transition." --TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 06:45, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't see it either, but that was added by the person who has raised some concerns on the talk page. I've asked him if he has a source for it, am waiting to hear back. --Hunter Kahn (talk) 17:46, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I dropped this and told the guy that he should source it if he readds it. --Hunter Kahn (talk) 04:48, 20 February 2009 (UTC)


 * President
 * The significance of Blake Roberts and his encyclopedic import is lost on me. Why is this sentence in the article?
 * Actually, that wasn't added by me, that was somebody else. I dropped it. --Hunter Kahn (talk) 04:48, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
 * The artifacts are always the hardest call when editing.
 * Change "where he was responsible for the day-to-day operations of the transition" to "a position that was responsible for the day-to-day operations of the transition"
 * OK. --Hunter Kahn (talk) 04:48, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Is conflict of interest hyphenated or not. You present it both ways.
 * I believe (at least according to AP style) it's hyphenated when you use it when referring to conflict-of-interest rules or conflict-of-interest legislation, but when you are using it as a sentence like "This is a conflict of interest" then you don't use them. But if you prefer we just choose or the other, let me know, and I'll drop the hyphens. --Hunter Kahn (talk) 04:48, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I'll take your word for it.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 04:05, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
 * on message with the White House sounds unencyclopedic.
 * ?????--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 04:05, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Sorry, guess I missed this one. I tried a new wording, but I'm not married to it, so if you have a better suggestion I'm all for it. --Hunter Kahn (talk) 05:38, 21 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Personal
 * One the sources mentioned that he has lived in MD, DC and VA. That is probably an interesting part of his background to include. --TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 22:22, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Added. --Hunter Kahn (talk) 04:48, 20 February 2009 (UTC)


 * I agree that this article desperately needs a photo, but I haven't had luck finding any that can be used. Have any suggestions for me as to where I can look? --Hunter Kahn (talk) 05:47, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Does Lu attend Obama press gatherings. Maybe he is in the background of some photos by accident.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 22:42, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Not that I've found. There are pictures of him here, here, here and here but I doubt we're allowed to use any of them. There's a poor-quality YouTube video of him here, but I don't believe a screenshot from here would be useable. --Hunter Kahn (talk) 03:00, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Official review
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria


 * 1) Is it reasonably well written?
 * A. Prose quality:
 * B. MoS compliance:
 * 1) Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
 * A. References to sources:
 * B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
 * C. No original research:
 * 1) Is it broad in its coverage?
 * A. Major aspects:
 * B. Focused:
 * 1) Is it neutral?
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * No edit wars, etc:
 * 1) 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:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * Great work. Thanks for your patience.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 03:36, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * No edit wars, etc:
 * 1) 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:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * Great work. Thanks for your patience.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 03:36, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * Great work. Thanks for your patience.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 03:36, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Great work. Thanks for your patience.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 03:36, 22 February 2009 (UTC)