Talk:John Sherman Cooper/GA1

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

Reviewer: Ealdgyth (talk · contribs) 15:25, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

I'll bite. Review incoming. Ealdgyth - Talk 15:25, 6 January 2012 (UTC)


 * GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * Just a few spots needing a bit of attention
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars, etc.:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * General:
 * I assumed we'd see this at FAC, so I reviewed it accordingly.
 * Eventually, but my main goal is still a Governors of Kentucky featured topic. Martha Layne Collins is currently at FAC (again) after gaining no reviews last time, and James Garrard is ready to go there after her. I'm also working on Charles Scott, so it will be a while before I will be able to nominate a non-governor FAC. Maybe A-class MILHIST next.
 * Generally we reserve "Bibliography" for a listing of works by the subject of the article, so probably should change your headings for your reference sections - suggest either "Citations" or "Notes" for the citations and "References" or "Sources" for the sources.
 * I've used this notation in all of my Kentucky governor articles. For works by the subject of the article, I use "Works written by...", as in Harry Toulmin (Unitarian minister). Is there a specific policy or guideline on this?
 * I'm assuming no children?
 * I didn't run across any references to children, no. Considering that the Schulman biography is the most complete work I've found, and it doesn't mention any, I'm saying no.
 * Lead:
 * Generally American subjects use "U.S." not "US". Also need to explain the abbreviation on first usage.
 * That used to be linked to U.S. state, but someone came along and redid many of my U.S. abbreviations to "US" a while back. Failed to get this changed back until now.
 * Do we REALLY need the link for "popularly elected"? Especially as we then do NOT link "gubernatorial bid"?
 * I think it's a useful link, since non-U.S. readers may not realize that U.S. Senators were once elected by state legislatures. What would you link "gubernatorial bid" to? Governor of Kentucky? There isn't a Kentucky gubernatorial election, 1939. Maybe one day I'll get around to that, but it won't be soon.
 * Linkie for "Kentucky's 28th district"?
 * Is it common to have articles for state (as opposed to federal) legislative districts?
 * "he worked with Idaho Democrat Frank Church on..." Linkie Democrat?
 * Actually, the first use is in the paragraph prior, but yes it needs to be (and has been) linked.
 * Early life:
 * Can we get a year for "shortly after Daniel Boone"?
 * Schulman gives an estimate. Added.
 * Link for "public schools" and "fifth grade"?
 * I haven't typically linked those terms, but I have no problem doing so. Done.
 * Linkie for "Bachelor of Arts"?
 * Odd. I do typically link that. Guess I just missed it. Done.
 * Early political career:
 * Linkie for Roscoe Tarter?
 * I doubt he'd pass WP:POLITICIAN. As far as I know, he was just a local judge, and was probably only that because he was a member of the Cooper family. In my reading about Kentucky politics, this is the first time I've run into his name.
 * Ambassador:
 * Need to know what offices "...including John B. Hollister, Herbert Hoover, Jr., and George M. Humphrey." held.
 * Done.
 * Later service:
 * Linkie for "nuclear weapons testing"?
 * My knowledge of the Cold War is pretty weak, but I didn't find a suitable link in John F. Kennedy. Did you have a suggestion?
 * Opposition:
 * Year for the Gulf of Tonkin resolution?
 * Done.
 * I've done some copyediting, please feel free to fix anything I inadvertantly broke. Mostly it was linking/delinking. We now have a tool to show us duplicate links - I can dig it out if you are interested.
 * I just restored the "Y." in "John Y. Brown, Sr." "John Y. Brown" is a very popular name in Kentucky politics; four Kentucky officeholders have carried it. They all use the middle initial routinely and consistently. As for teh link tool, it never hurts to have that kind of thing for reference.
 * I've put the article on hold for seven days to allow folks to address the issues I've brought up. Feel free to contact me on my talk page, or here with any concerns, and let me know one of those places when the issues have been addressed. If I may suggest that you strike out, check mark, or otherwise mark the items I've detailed, that will make it possible for me to see what's been addressed, and you can keep track of what's been done and what still needs to be worked on. Ealdgyth - Talk 16:17, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the review. Let me know if you find other issues. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 18:24, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Looks good! Looking forward to seeing this at FAC - although I cannot necessarily promise that I got the "brilliant and engaging" prose part of the criteria here, it's looking pretty good otherwise. Ealdgyth - Talk 18:19, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Done.
 * I've done some copyediting, please feel free to fix anything I inadvertantly broke. Mostly it was linking/delinking. We now have a tool to show us duplicate links - I can dig it out if you are interested.
 * I just restored the "Y." in "John Y. Brown, Sr." "John Y. Brown" is a very popular name in Kentucky politics; four Kentucky officeholders have carried it. They all use the middle initial routinely and consistently. As for teh link tool, it never hurts to have that kind of thing for reference.
 * I've put the article on hold for seven days to allow folks to address the issues I've brought up. Feel free to contact me on my talk page, or here with any concerns, and let me know one of those places when the issues have been addressed. If I may suggest that you strike out, check mark, or otherwise mark the items I've detailed, that will make it possible for me to see what's been addressed, and you can keep track of what's been done and what still needs to be worked on. Ealdgyth - Talk 16:17, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the review. Let me know if you find other issues. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 18:24, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Looks good! Looking forward to seeing this at FAC - although I cannot necessarily promise that I got the "brilliant and engaging" prose part of the criteria here, it's looking pretty good otherwise. Ealdgyth - Talk 18:19, 7 January 2012 (UTC)