Talk:Superdelegate/GA1

GA Review
This review is transcluded from Talk:Superdelegate/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Beginning the preliminary review process SweetMelissaGT (talk) 19:04, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Good Article Review Results This review was taken as of: 12:27, 9 June 2008 Overall, I was impressed by the time and thought put into this article by its authors. I was impressed by the general writing style and attention to detail.


 * Is the article well written? Pass
 * The article is generally written well although there were some small issues with style. There is also an expansive amount of information regarding the 2008 "superdelegate" situation which might be compressed or moved to a year specific page at a later date when the 2008 presidential elections conclude.
 * Recommendations:
 * Add more information on historical significance of "superdelegates" to balance information on 2008 events OR
 * Reduce information that is in flux OR
 * Move information to a new, year or event-specific page.
 * Choose either quotes or italics to emphasize terms. Currently there is a disparity (ex. distinguished party leader, "add-ons")
 * Check spelling (ex. which softened the penalty intiially imposed on)
 * Make reference styles consistent within the article.


 * Is the information in the article verifiable? Fail'''
 * This article's talk page indicates that there is a significant debate about the reliability of sources and that there is a lack of consensus in some areas.
 * Recommendations
 * Increase the number of sources for controversial information OR
 * Come to a consensus on what sources are acceptable


 * Is the article thorough? Pass
 * The article is thorough on the topic although more information on historical significance would be useful to balance out 2008 information.
 * Recommendations
 * Increase historical information
 * Increase creation and voting process information


 * Is the article neutrally written? Fail
 * The article provides states that it is a general article about "superdelegates" but it places heavy weight on the results of the 2008 Democratic National Convention which gives it bias towards the events of that year. Since the actually impact on the 2008 presidential election has not been fully realized, the article should place less emphasis on current events and more on history and clarification of the process of "superdelegate" creation and voting procedures.
 * Recommendations
 * (See #1)


 * Is the article stable? Fail
 * This article is still subject to frequent editing by multiple editors.
 * Recommendation
 * Reapply for good article status when the frequency of edits is drastically reduced.


 * Does the article use images appropriately? Pass
 * This article currently contains no images although diagrams or images could be helpful to understanding the complicated procedures and terms listed.
 * Start the article with a right-aligned lead image if an appropriate neutral image can be found.

SweetMelissaGT (talk) 14:01, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

If Glenn Beck is to be believed, he has a video which explains The History of Democratic Superdelegates in easy, concise form. Asteriks (talk) 17:21, 22 August 2008 (UTC)