Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/George W. Romney/archive1


 * The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was not promoted by Karanacs 21:47, 19 January 2010.

George W. Romney

 * Nominator(s): Wasted Time R (talk) 12:51, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured article because I think it meets the criteria and tells a compelling story. George Romney was in turn a displaced person, a college dropout, a finder of an accidental career, a wartime industrial leader, a famous corporate CEO, a religious leader, a successful governor, a front-running but then dreadful presidential candidate, a quixotic cabinet secretary, and more. He's also the father of a leading 2008 (and likely 2012) presidential candidate, Mitt Romney. The article recently underwent a very thorough GA review and has had fairly minor subject matter and MOS work done since. Wasted Time R (talk) 12:51, 29 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Comments -
 * What makes the following reliable sources?
 * http://www.familysearch.org/Eng/search/AF/pedigree_view.asp?recid=1874486&familyid=230671&frompage=99 (Hint, it's not likely going to be provable, Ancestral File isn't going to be reliable, as it's a collection of user submitted data, the LDS church does NOT publish it in the usual sense of the word.)
 * Same for http://www.familysearch.org/Eng/search/AF/family_group_record.asp?familyid=190631&frompage=99
 * And http://www.familysearch.org/Eng/search/AF/individual_record.asp?recid=6362184&frompage=99
 * http://www.centerforpolitics.org/crystalball/article.php?id=FRC2007092001
 * I'll leave this out for other reviewers to decide for themselves. Ealdgyth - Talk 16:54, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
 * http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G1-16389040.html
 * http://law.onecle.com/michigan/19-board-of-state-auditors/mcl-19-132.html
 * On this one, you can cite the law itself. Ealdgyth - Talk 16:54, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
 * OK, I've now done that. Wasted Time R (talk) 19:37, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Current ref 4 does not give a pedigree, gives a blank search form.
 * Make sure all your newspapers are italicised. You missed current ref 56 at least.
 * Current ref 197 (Glad...) lacks a last access date
 * Otherwise, sources look okay, links checked out with the link checker tool. Ealdgyth - Talk 15:27, 29 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks as usual for your sourcing checks.
 * I guess I was mistaken about the FamilySearch site, so I've yanked all of those cites and replaced them with book cites (I was mostly relying on it for years that people lived). The only year range I had to lose was for Romney's mother, which I haven't yet been able to find elsewhere.
 * The article at http://www.centerforpolitics.org/crystalball/article.php?id=FRC2007092001 is published by Sabato's Crystal Ball, associated with Larry Sabato and the Center for Politics at the University of Virginia in Charlottesville. They are well regarded for non-partisan political analysis.  The title "Senior Columnist" for the author is just a characteristic of this publication; all of their articles are called "columns".  They are pretty much equivalent to stories in The Politico or "News analysis" pieces by reporters in The New York Times.
 * The url http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G1-16389040.html was just a teaser for a paywalled article in the magazine Campaigns and Elections Politics.  I've removed the URL since its form is misleading.
 * The url http://law.onecle.com/michigan/19-board-of-state-auditors/mcl-19-132.html is one of those sites that aggregates legal decisions and published laws and the like. I'm only using it for the date of the building's renaming, which is uncontroversial but which I couldn't find sourced anywhere else.
 * Former ref 4 was a FamilySearch one, now nuked.
 * Former ref 56 was a special case, since I was referencing The New York Times article search page, rather than any particular article. But I changed it to italics.  There shouldn't be any real newspaper references that aren't italicized, since I use "cite news | newspaper=...".
 * Former ref 197 had a publication date (Summer 2007), but it wasn't very clear on that page, so I've added an access date too. Wasted Time R (talk) 16:45, 29 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment re the Family Search site. While the particular information cited may not be a reliable source because of the multiple contributors to it, in this particular case following the links to those submitters can lead to a Wikijargon reliable source because one of those submitters is none other than
 * GEORGE WILCKEN ROMNEY 	Microfilm:   	1394283
 * 1840 E VALLEY ROAD
 * BLOOMFIELD HILLS MI 	Submission: 	AF83-065690
 * USA 48013
 * and it looks to me like that self-information published on that particular microfilm (available from LDS) would be a reliable source for some purposes in this article. Gene Nygaard (talk) 07:03, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

No dab links, and dates are consistent Month Day, Year throughout—good. --an odd name 04:37, 30 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Comments on refs
 * In refs but not notes: Angel, D. Duane (1967); Hess, Stephen & Broder, David S. (1967); Plas, Gerald O. (1967); Romney, George W. (1968) and another Romney, George W. (1968) [these should be 1968a and 1968b if they are somehow used].


 * &bull; Ling.Nut 10:36, 1 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks for checking these. Since the book list section is called "Bibliography", I included books specifically about Romney, even if they weren't used in any citations.  This covers the Angel and Plas books.  I haven't been about to find the Angel book; there were a plethora of Romney 'campaign bio' books published in 1967-68, all of which have fallen into obscurity (I had to use interlibrary loan just to get the two major and most-reviewed ones, Harris and Mollenhoff).  The Plas book is a sloppily-written anti-Romney screed that got poor reviews at the time; I've looked at it but didn't consider it reliable enough to make reference to. I also included the two books written by Romney for completeness, even though they were campaign-time publications and of no value as sources.  The Hess and Broder book doesn't belong, since it isn't primarily about Romney and wasn't used for a citation, and I've removed it.  Wasted Time R (talk) 13:34, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Some people throw extra books into that section, and I won't Oppose for it, but every time I've submitted articles to journals they've always disallowed the practice. I would suggest placing the books that you've read into a "Further reading" section, and removing the books that you have not read. But I won't Oppose, so I'm not forcing you. &bull; Ling.Nut 01:23, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I haven't done this in journal articles I've published, but I have seen other journal articles give a long list and then say something like "references 3, 5, 12, 20, 22 not cited in article". But there's no precedent for doing that in WP that I've seen.  But returning to this WP Romney article, there's a sentence in it that says: "A spate of books were published about Romney, more than for any other candidate, and included a friendly campaign biography, an attack from a former staffer, and a collection of Romney's speeches.[147]"  This 'spate of books' includes all of the ones that are listed in the Bibliography but aren't cited, so I think that's additional justification for them being here.  Again, I'm using 'Bibliography' in the fuller sense of 'books about Romney and books that were used in writing this article', not just 'books about Romney that were used in writing this article'.  Wasted Time R (talk) 04:01, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Image review: File:Bundesarchiv B 145 Bild-F026120-0014, US-Gouverneur Romney und Freiherr von Guttenberg.jpg and File:NixonAndRomneyInOffice.jpg are verifiably in the public domain. File:GeroRomney2.jpg is pending an OTRS; it was hosted on the University of Michigan and not all Ford Presidential Library materials are public domain. However, since I submitted the OTRS (after corresponding with the Library), I am confident it would pass. Jappalang (talk) 03:14, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Okay, thanks very much for checking these. Wasted Time R (talk) 12:37, 8 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Dabs; please check the disambiguation links identified in the toolbox. Dabomb87 (talk) 22:38, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
 * The dabs were clean when I filed the FAC, then a couple of days later someone changed the redirect on "dairy bar" to point to a disambig page instead of a regular article. Since there actually aren't any articles that describe a dairy bar in the U.S., I've now unlinked the use of the phrase in this article.  Wasted Time R (talk) 22:51, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Support A well-researched and well-organized article, and all my concerns (below) have been resolved by the nominator. —Eustress talk 22:08, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments —Eustress talk 20:27, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
 * It is possible to assuage the red links used throughout the article?
 * Thanks very much for your comments. I think the red links in the article are justified under the WP:REDLINK guidelines.  I'm a big believer in red links, as they point other editors towards fruitful ideas for article creation. It's a little similar to how academic papers how "unsolved problems" or "further work" sections.
 * Won't hold up FA status —Eustress talk 04:18, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't see anything in WP:WIAFA about redlinks. Wasted Time R (talk) 04:43, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Yeah...I think I was thinking more about FLC criteria, which is why I crossed it out already. Thanks. —Eustress talk 04:55, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Article seems to be lacking critical images pertinent to the subject: Romney in 1912, Romney on cover of Time Magazine, etc.
 * WP cannot use those images under its fair use rules. The first is owned by the family and/or the University of Utah, and magazine covers can only be used in articles about the magazine itself.  Indeed, the Time cover used to be in this article, but was thrown out by other editors.
 * That's too bad. What about Romney during "brainwashing" interview (TV screenshot fair-use rationale?), and various pictures here (Romney with Reagan, in front of AMC) and here? The article just seems quite absent of images for one who lived in the spotlight. —Eustress talk 04:18, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Wire service photos are never usable; per WP:Non-free content #6, unacceptable use includes "A photo from a press agency (e.g. AP), unless the photo itself is the subject of sourced commentary in the article" (which it isn't in this case). The screenshot ones are dubious in terms of fair use and of poor quality.  I've searched and searched and searched for WP-usable photos of Romney, and these are all I've come up with.  I agree it's paltry, but the image-checkers at FAC are very rigorous about throwing out images with even slightly dubious rationales, I've experienced it several times in the past on other articles.  Wasted Time R (talk) 04:43, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your consideration. —Eustress talk 04:55, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Seems to me the bit about the George Romney Lifetime Achievement Award should go in some kind of "Legacy" section, since I don't believe the award was begun until after his death. Same issue with the naming of BYU's public management institute.
 * I'm reluctant to create a legacy section for just these items, because it tends to indicate that that's the entire extent of his legacy. There's arguably a lot more.  So I kept the volunteerism 'naming afters' in that section, and put the other 'naming afters' in the Final years section.
 * Perhaps "legacy" is poor word choice. Maybe "posthumous honors"? Anyway, if there is more out there, I believe it needs to be researched in order for the article to be considered comprehensive. —Eustress talk 04:18, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
 * By more in terms of legacy, I mean his civil rights record, his record as a business executive with a high public profile, things like that. I've tried to describe and cite those legacies during the article's biographical narrative, rather than at the end.  Wasted Time R (talk) 04:43, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I've now clarified and cited that the George W. Romney Volunteer Center began during Romney's lifetime, and thus belongs in the volunteerism section. I've moved the Governor George Romney Lifetime Achievement Award into the "Final years" section, to join the other posthumous awards/namings.  I think this is better, and hopefully this will satisfy your concerns.  Wasted Time R (talk) 01:45, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for working on this issue. I think you've struck a good compromise. —Eustress talk 22:08, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Is it POV in the "Final years" section to say "he was prominent"? I think we can let the facts speak for themselves.
 * I simply wanted to contrast it with his lack of prominence in the public/political world. It's the final instance of a thematic thread of the article, which is that Romney took his religion very, very seriously.
 * That sounds reasonable. —Eustress talk 04:18, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Unless beginning a sentence, numbers greater than ten should be rendered in numbers (e.g., "eighty-eight" --> "88").
 * WP:ORDINAL blesses rendering numbers as words "if they are expressed in one or two words", with "eighty-four" given as an example; "eighty-eight" is allowed too. If it really bothers you, I can change it.
 * You use numbers when expressing how many grandchildren and great-grandchildren survived him later in the paragraph. Best be consistent throughout the article. —Eustress talk 04:18, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
 * OK, I've changed it. Wasted Time R (talk) 04:43, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks —Eustress talk 04:55, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Is there any way to decrease the length of the title of the table in the "1968 presidential campaign" section? A footnote would do.
 * This is really more of a caption than a title, except I could figure out how to get it at the bottom of the table. I don't want this text in the footnote because it is very critical: the most commonly false claim made about Romney is that he lost the presidential primary race because of the "brainwashing" remark.  As the table makes clear, he was already losing the race and had been for a while; the remark just changed him from being behind to being way behind.  Wasted Time R (talk) 03:15, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I think what I'd really like is a "footnote" somewhere immediately below the table. The text, "Romney was trailing almost from the start, and his numbers dropped further after the August 31, 1967, 'brainwashing" remark'" is more commentary than title material. Can you somehow make the title more concise? —Eustress talk 04:18, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I'll look at whether I can change this to a less prominent caption. Wasted Time R (talk) 04:43, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I've figured out how to rework the caption to supply only a brief title at the top and put the rest of the explanation below the table rows. It looks a lot better to me (thanks for pushing me on it), see what you think.  Wasted Time R (talk) 01:45, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I agree, much better! —Eustress talk 22:08, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Would you consider a more traditional portrait shot for the infobox image? (see here)
 * There's no source information for that photo, so we can't use it either. Wasted Time R (talk) 04:43, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
 * All right. Thanks for entertaining my salient takeaways from reviewing the article! —Eustress talk 04:55, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks very much for your comments and your support! Wasted Time R (talk) 23:47, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.