Wikipedia:Peer review/George H. W. Bush 1992 presidential campaign/archive1

George H. W. Bush 1992 presidential campaign


I've listed this article for peer review because I want to nominate it for good article. It is already submitted for copy-editing, and I want to know what can be improved in article, particularly lead section. Thanks, Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 11:55, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

The article was copy-edited a few days ago. Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 07:34, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

The article in nominated for GA, and Peer Review is archived. Thanks a lot for your suggestions and feedback!! Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 05:30, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

Comments from Extraordinary Writ
Per your request, I'm here to provide some suggestions for improving this article.
 * The prose has a few issues, but since you've already sent it over to GOCE, I won't comment too much about it. (In other words, once they've gone through it, I don't anticipate there being any problems.)
 * The article was copy-edited some days ago.


 * The short-form citations confuse me. What are "Jelen, p. 18" and "Kurtz, p. 90"? They don't seem to refer to any other citations.
 * ✅ Template:Sfn is added with Books being mentioned in References section.


 * My main concern here is that a lot of this article is basically just summaries of articles on related topics. While it's certainly important to provide background and context, it becomes problematic when only a minority of the article is about the topic at hand. So:
 * The sections on "background" and "presidency" should probably be combined and shrunk down into, say, three paragraphs. Bush's presidency is background, so there's no use writing about it separately. I think having one paragraph on Bush's biography and two on his presidency would be sufficient; if readers really want to know the details on these issues, there are separate articles about them.
 * ✅ Have tried to summarize in three paragraphs.


 * The "campaign" section should be a lot longer, for it is, after all, what this article is supposed to be about! You could consider having separate subsections for, e.g., healthcare, the economy, social issues, foreign affairs, etc.
 * ✅ Have added political positions, opinion polling (with graph) and endorsements table.


 * I'd also expand the "Republican presidential primaries" section. How did Bush campaign against Buchanan? What were his arguments? Did he campaign lightly or heavily? Discuss the primaries from Bush's perspective, not Buchanan's.
 * Added some more content.


 * This article relies almost exclusively on newspapers. While that's not bad per se, I think the article would read much more consistently if it relied on sources written after the fact. And that means books. I would encourage to try to get a hold of some book-length biographies of Bush. There are a few listed at George H. W. Bush, such as the ones by Greene, Meacham, and Naftali. Books on American elections or presidents more broadly might also have useful content. You might be able to find relevant books through a local library, or you could use the Internet Archive's free online . This is so very important, albeit difficult to explain: books help to distill the events into a coherent story, providing broader themes, narratives, and analyses instead of just lists of events. They help you answer the "why" and the "how" instead of just the "what".
 * ✅ Have included some, will surely include more books.

This is a difficult and complex topic, and your work on it is very much appreciated. I'm honestly not sure what would happen if the article went to GAN in its present form: it would probably depend on the reviewer. I'd encourage you to keep working on the content, seeking feedback from a variety of people as you go. Cheers, Extraordinary Writ (talk) 19:25, 22 May 2021 (UTC)


 * Hi, thanks a lot for your suggestions. I agree with you that it has too much background information on Bush in the prose, which I have tried to summarize. Some time ago, I asked another user for his suggestions (which can be found here), he too mentioned the same but said that it is fine of other sections are adequately long. I will surely make the content in sections like Gaining nomination and Campaign are increased. I really appreciate your suggestions for taking citations and references from books, which I have done, and will include more books in other edits. Was also planning to include a subsection "Political positions" in General election campaign section, which will include his stand on healthcare, the economy, etc. and much of events that occurred during the campaign in its regard (ex. Quayle's feud with Murphy Brown, etc.) Will keep you updated with the changes. Thankyou! Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 12:45, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

Comments from Vacant0
Per user's request, I'm going to look through the article and give some of my comments.
 * Infobox is clear and it fits the MOS:INFOBOXPURPOSE criteria in my opinion. Although, something that I've noticed is that there is a couple of templates (well it's in this case), and because of that, it can be hard for some users to read the text. These small tags can be removed.
 * The introduction looks good. For the WP:MOSLEAD, you can add more MOS:LEADELEMENTS, otherwise I think it meets WP:DUE and WP:MOSLEAD and criteria.
 * ✅ Added some MOS:LEADELEMENTS


 * I've read and noticed that there are still some claims that aren't cited (they might be but I suggest adding refs at the end of every sentence).
 * I have tried to add citation after almost every sentence, but in some places, I have skipped some sentences mostly due to two or more sentences having same citation.


 * The amount of images seems in my opinion to be alright, there aren't too many of them so I wouldn't tag . Also, in the "Aftermath" section, more precisely in the image, do you mind changing from George Bush to George H.W. Bush or just Bush.


 * The political positions section can be useful, it will be easier for readers to see what Bush has campaigned for.
 * ✅ Have added a paragraph on political positions.


 * The user above also made some good points and I recommend fixing them if they're any left.
 * Considered almost all the points.


 * Besides all of this, I don't see more problems with this article. Good luck with your work! --Vacant0 (talk) 13:40, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi Hi, thanks for your suggestions. I have tried to make the required changes. There templates in the infobox of almost all election campaign articles, that's why I have inserted that in the article. Also, initially I had planed of adding the political positions in the article, but the topic of political positions deserves an separate article, but I would surely consider creating separate article and adding its summary in this article. Appreciate any other suggestions! Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 14:57, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Small text in infoboxes is discouraged quite strongly by MOS:SMALL, though its application has been pretty uneven. —Nizolan (talk · c.) 12:42, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
 * I agree that its application has been pretty uneven, as even some Featured articles use tag in infobox. (like William McKinley 1896 presidential campaign). I even support its use in particular cases, as without small tag in the article, infobox would be unnecessarily long.

Comments from Nizolan
Some comments per request:
 * The part beginning "The Cold War ended with the dissolution of the Soviet Union." seems a little awkward to me. The final dissolution of the USSR came after the fall of the Berlin Wall, and "a major event" isn't a useful description. I noticed that the Sloan source frames Bush's German reunification policy in terms of the context of the broader collapse of Soviet power ("the Soviet regime's position was weakening on all fronts" etc.), so perhaps you could move the end of the Cold War and dissolution of the USSR to the end of this paragraph, capping off Bush's perceived success in foreign policy, and describe the reunification policy first as part of the background.
 * ✅: Moved the cold war part in the end of that paragraph.


 * Some indication of the contrast between the economic problems and the foreign policy successes would make sense (like the section on "Preparing for a run" already does). This could just be "However" or something at the start of the "As the economy went into a recession in 1990 ..." paragraph.
 * ✅: Added "However".


 * "His campaign raised $14,933,082 from donations." – I couldn't find this figure in the source, the citation might need to be clearer. Plus, as written, "his" means Buchanan's, but the source is Bush's filings. There's also no context as to how significant the figure is.
 * ✅: Changed the entire line and provided a citation with Buchanan's filing.


 * The section title Getting an opponent seems inaccurate given that it ends with two opponents, Gore and Perot, and "getting" might imply that Bush himself was responsible for choosing them. "Nominees of other parties", "Opposition", or the like might work better.
 * ✅: Changed to "Opponents".

Beyond this point the issues I found are mostly just about ungrammatical or unclear phrasing:
 * He explained he did not want the House of Representatives to decide the election if the result caused the electoral college to be split, and also because ... – The syntax here is problematic ("he explained because" doesn't work). Needs something like "and he had also been deterred" rather than "and also".
 * ✅: Separated as two sentences, correcting the syntax.


 * Upon increase in polling numbers of Perot, Bush wrote – Slightly wonky syntax again and it might be useful to specify the month, e.g. "As Perot's polling numbers increased in X" (whenever the diary entry was written).
 * ✅: It was mentioned in the previous line Initially, the opinion polls showed President Bush leading with almost 45% to Clinton's 25%, and Perot's 24%, but his lead soon reduced in May, when Perot started leading the polls.. Made other modification as suggested.


 * Upon Perot's re-entrance in the race, Clinton was leading over both Bush and Perot. – Needs a citation.
 * ✅: Added citation


 * This backfired as Bush campaigned against abortion. – What's "this", and who did it backfire on? As written it implies it's Diane English's statement that backfired on her, which I'm guessing isn't the intent.
 * ✅ Changed the line as "Quayle's comments backfired and were widely attacked for seeming to be insensitive to single mothers"


 * He stressed on his Clean Air Act, and blamed the democratic controlled congress to ignore ... – Should be "He stressed his Clean Air Act, and blamed the Democratic-controlled Congress for ignoring ..."
 * ✅ Made the change


 * Although he continued Reagan's supply-side economics, but while campaigning – Either "although" or "but" needs to be cut.
 * ✅ Removed "although"


 * his notion on both sides of major issues – Not sure what this means. Is the idea "his inconsistency on major issues"?
 * ✅ Yeah, I meant the same. Replaced his notion on both sides of major issues with the phrase mentioned.


 * "It's the economy, stupid" has an article which should be linked.
 * ✅ Added the link


 * James Baker pointed that – Should be "pointed out that".
 * ✅ Made the change.


 * Some minor Manual of Style points: curly quotes “” need to be changed to straight quotes "", punctuation should go outside the quotation unless the quotation is itself a sentence (e.g. his "biggest mistake". not his "biggest mistake."), "from" shouldn't be mixed with a dash (on August 17–20, not from August 17–20).
 * ✅ Adding punctuation before or after quotations always confused me. Thanks for clarifying, and I made the changes

Looks very solid overall, good job. —Nizolan (talk · c.) 12:42, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks a lot for your comprehensive Peer review comments. I have made the changes and the article surely seems better that before. Appreciate any additional feedback. Thanks again! Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 15:34, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

Comments by Z1720

 * The first paragraph does not mention that Bush and Quale are the president and VP during this campaign. This should be included here.
 * I have changed Bush, a Republican and former vice president to "Bush, a Republican president and former vice president" in lead's first paragraph. Will look for any other place to do so.


 * "he ran for the U.S. House of Representatives from Texas's 7th congressional district in 1966 and won the election." -> "he was elected to the U.S. House of Representatives from Texas's 7th congressional district in 1966."


 * The second paragraph in the lede goes into too much detail abou Bush's political career. I would trim, merge this with info about his presidential administration, and have the last paragraph talk about the campaign. Afterall, the article is about the campaign and not Bush's election history.
 * ✅ Almost re-framed the second paragraph of lead, removed his background information and added info about campaign.


 * "Texas billionaire Ross Perot decided to run as an independent third-party" -> "Texas billionaire Ross Perot ran as an independent third-party"


 * The lede doesn't mention any major events in the campaign, which surprised me. I also think the lede needs to emphasize the importance of Buchanan's primary challenge.
 * ✅ Added events like New Hampshire Primary, Convention (and speculation to drop Quayle out of ticket), etc. Will see if anything else major can be included.


 * "In 1964, he ran for the United States Senate and won the Republican nomination, but lost the election by 56% to 44%." Which state?
 * ✅ Added Texas.


 * "He ran his presidential campaign in 1980 against Ronald Reagan, Bob Dole, and many other Republican candidates." -> "He ran in the 1980 Republican Party presidential primaries against..."


 * "but ultimately ended up losing many contests to Reagan, and dropped out of the race." Remove ultimately


 * "For his running mate, Reagan chose Bush," -> "Reagan chose Bush to run as the Republican nominee for vice president"


 * "As vice president, Bush generally maintained a low profile by avoiding-decision making" remove generally


 * " with Bush being re-elected as vice president." Remove being


 * I would split the third paragraph in the Background section so that the 1987/8 campaign had its own paragraph.
 * ✅ Have split the background content related to 1990's as separate paragraph.


 * The background section should not contain any information on what Bush did during the campaign, like "During the campaign, he strongly emphasized his foreign policy success."
 * ✅ Moved the content to the "Campaign" section


 * "Bush's decision to sign the bill damaged his standing with conservatives and the public. He had broken his pledge never to raise taxes." -> "Bush's decision to sign the bill damaged his standing with conservatives and the public as he broke his pledge to never to raise taxes."

I'll pause there and continue later. Z1720 (talk) 17:20, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your comments, I have tried to fix most of them; would surely fix the remaining in few hours. Appreciate any feedback. Will look for your other suggestions. Thanks! Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 17:46, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Fixed all suggestions. Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 06:29, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

Continuing:
 * For Pat Buchanan's portrait in "Republican presidential primaries", can the caption include the date that the portrait was taken?
 * ✅ Added 1985.


 * "He explained the reason" -> "Buchanan explained the reason"


 * "During the early counting of the votes at the New Hampshire primary, it appeared that the president might lose to Buchanan" -> "Early results of the New Hampshire primary favored Buchanan, but the final results gave a victory to Bush with 53% of the votes, followed by Buchanan with 38% of the vote" This tightens up the language


 * " Buchanan's score nearly matched Eugene McCarthy’s protest vote against Lyndon B. Johnson in 1968." Why is this relevant? If it's just trivia, delete.
 * I guess it is relevant as it signifies Buchanan's primary challenge to an incumbent president, in comparison with Eugene McCarthy's performance against Johnson (which influenced Robert Kennedy's decision to enter the race, and maybe even forced Johnson not to seek re-election.)


 * "his campaign managed to raise $14,521,899 from donations." consider adding Template:inflation here.


 * "the campaign pollster Bob Teeter" is this Bush's campaign pollster?
 * ✅ Yes, Bob Teeter is Bush's campaign pollster Robert Teeter. Changed 'Bob' to 'Robert' in the article.


 * "while Dan Quayle insisted that he should not" -> "while Dan Quayle disagreed"


 * "Agreeing with Quayle" Take this out, the rest of the sentence infers that Bush agreed with Quayle.


 * "Buchanan managed to get 35% or more votes in primaries until March 10, after which, his ratings dropped and Bush went on to win all 51 contests." What happened March 10? Why did Buchanan's rating drop?
 * ✅ Added that March 10 was super Tuesday, where Bush won all the primaries which gave him a bounce in polls.


 * "Later, Buchanan endorsed Bush as the Republican nominee and was asked by the Bush campaign to deliver a keynote address at Republican National Convention (RNC), where his culture war speech alienated many moderates." Move this to the RNC section. Keep everything chronological.


 * "The fact that Buchanan got almost 2.9 million votes threatened Bush's campaign for his presidential run." Why? If this is explained later, move this information to later in the article.


 * "over 28 days. In addition, the National Football League's" -> "over 28 days, while the National Football League's"


 * "President Bush dropping Quayle from the ticket." replace dropping with removing to remove jargon.


 * "while Jeb Bush also urged him to get rid of Quayle" replace get rid of with replace, per jargon.


 * "Notably, the 1992 convention" Delete notably.


 * " of his long political career." delete long


 * "This would be Nixon's last RNC, as he died in 1994." Delete, as this sounds like trivia.


 * "since he stood before the convention in New Orleans four years before." -> "since the previous RNC convention four years before."

I'll pause there and contribute more comments later. A quick skim of the opponents section causes me concern with how long it is. Perhaps consider cutting it down and removing any information that is not pertinent to Bush's 1992 campaign. If people want to read about the opponents, they can go to their articles. Z1720 (talk) 23:00, 6 June 2021 (UTC)


 * Hi @Z1720, I have fixed almost all the suggestions and have removed some content from "Opponents" section which wasn't related to Bush campaign. Just a few queries regarding article:
 * Would it be beneficial/advisable to archive all the citation links in the article using Wayback Machine?
 * Yes. Z1720 (talk) 21:26, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Copyvio detector shows "violation possible", but only for those text which are under "direct quotation". Can that be ignored, or the direct quotation needs to be trimmed?
 * Direct quotations should only be used if they enhance the article. Reviewers will probably look at the comparison between the article and the source and realize that the direct quotes caused the high percentage and ignore it. Z1720 (talk) 21:26, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
 * ✅ @Z1720: Almost all the links which were possible to archive through Wayback Machine have been archived. (See edit 1; 2) Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 17:05, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Appreciate any feedback. Will look for your other suggestions. Thanks! Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 05:29, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

Continuing:
 * " was rocked by scandal" reword as rocked by is jargon.
 * ✅ Rephrased the sentence.


 * "At the same time, Clinton was accused" -> "Clinton was also accused"


 * "Clinton's lead eventually increased, " when? give a date.
 * ✅ Added February 1992


 * " on the saxophone." saxophone doesn't need to be wikilinked
 * ✅ Removed link


 * "Clinton received a significant poll bounce from the convention," poll bounce is jargon
 * ✅ Replaced with "significant increase in his polling numbers"


 * "and Ross Perot announcing that he was" -> "and Ross Perot's announcement that"


 * "withdrawing from the campaign just as the convention was ending." Be more specific. The last day? The last hour?
 * ✅ Added "last day"


 * "Texas billionaire businessman Ross Perot appeared on Larry King Live on February 20, 1992. When Larry King asked him about any scenario in which he would run for president, Perot said he did not want to run, but spontaneously affirmed that he would begin a campaign if "ordinary people" signed petitions and helped him achieve ballot access in all 50 states." -> "Texas businessman Ross Perot stated on Larry King Live on February 20, 1992, that he would begin a campaign if "ordinary people" signed petitions and helped him achieve ballot access in all 50 states."


 * "He chose retired" -> "Perot chose retired"


 * "Throughout April, the draft efforts continued, and Perot appeared on talk shows, discussing his plans and positions on political issues." Too many commas. Reword.
 * ✅ Removed some commas.


 * "He was willing to spend $100 million of his own money to finance the campaign." Is this the amount that he spent?
 * ✅ No, he was willing to spend almost $100 million, but he contributed $60,867,350.00 of his own money to the campaign. Added that in the article.


 * "his daughter by publicly releasing her doctored photographs to disrupting her wedding." -> and disrupting her wedding?


 * The "Campaign" section should be its own level 2 heading and split into various sections, imo. This is because this is the most important part of the article, and it's the point of having this article.
 * ✅ Agreeing with you, I created a level 2 heading for "Campaign", and splitting into sub headings "September" and "October", as done in Richard Nixon 1968 presidential campaign. Have also merged presidential debated sub-section in Campaign's October section (as debates were a part of campaign in October).


 * "In late August, even after RNC, Bush's polling numbers managed to reach only 36% to Clinton's 53%," Why is it important to have "even after the RNC"?
 * Well, most of the candidates get a polling bounce just after the convention, called Convention bounce. Bush's polling numbers were still weak, that's why it is worth mentioning.


 * "During rallies, he announced the immediate " Is this Perot or Bush?
 * ✅ Bush, added in article


 * "In late September, President Bush addressed the United Nations General Assembly in New York City." Why is this important?
 * ✅ Removed it.


 * The newspaper endorsements and picture of Bush on the train is creating MOS:SANDWICH, which should be fixed.

I'll continue later. Z1720 (talk) 21:26, 7 June 2021 (UTC)


 * Hi @Z1720, thanks for your help. I have archived almost half the citations, will do for all later. Most of the issues mentioned are resolved. Also, the "Election day" section can be merged in the "Campaign" section as "November" subheading. Will that work?Appreciate any feedback. Will look for your other suggestions. Thanks! Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 13:00, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
 * I would put "Election day" in its own section, or perhaps rename it "Results". Perhaps "October" can be merged with the beginning of "November" together. Also, I'm surprised there is no information about the campaign in August after the RNC. Z1720 (talk) 14:08, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Well I admit that there isn't much information of any major event, but since RNC ended on August 20, the information about the rest 10-11 days is given in the Campaign section itself without any sub-heading. I have now re-organised the sections, and included "August" section with some more information. Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 15:58, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
 * It looks like you got two paragraphs out of August, so I think we are OK with this! Z1720 (talk) 01:35, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

Continuing...


 * "Emphasizing on his welfare reform, he promised to "strike a new course" to build moral and family values of people on welfare." Can this be more specific? Did he announce at this time how he would reform welfare?
 * ✅ Added a line.


 * " campaigning, he claimed that his government's" delete he


 * Now you have SANDWICHING with the newspaper endorsements and the debate picture.
 * ✅I shifted both the debate image and endorsement table on the right side.


 * " on energy, a "carbon tax" Maybe "on energy, that he dubbed a "carbon tax""?


 * "his inconsistency on major issues." Like what?
 * ✅ Added "term limits" and "defense".


 * "Unlike Michael Dukakis's 1988 campaign, the Clinton campaign made a point of responding to Bush’s attacks usually on the same day.[135] Clinton's advisor, James Carville, coined a phrase "It's the economy, stupid", which was often used to attack Bush campaign.[136]" I think this is going offtopic and might be deleted.
 * I deleted the first line, keeping the second line, as I guess it's worth to mention.


 * "On October 6, 1992, a month before election day, President Bush signed an appropriation that would provide $5 million to a prospective transition. If Clinton were to win, the appropriation would give his transition team $3.5 million, and give $1.5 million to Bush's administration to aid them in the transition." This needs to be cited.
 * ✅ Added citation.


 * "himself, Governor Clinton, and Ross Perot," -> "himself, Clinton, and Perot"


 * ", who had by that time re-entered the race." Make this a new sentence and describe when Perot re-entered the race.


 * "himself, Senator Gore and James Stockdale." -> himself, Gore, and Stockdale.


 * " after each debate 20% of people" comma after debate.

Will continue later. Z1720 (talk) 01:35, 10 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Sure, thanks for your help. Almost all the issues mentioned are resolved. Appreciate any feedback. Will look for your other suggestions. Thanks! Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 04:17, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

Continuing
 * "as the 1912 election was, a three-way race" Delete this comma


 * "Perot's almost 19% of the popular vote made him the most successful third-party presidential candidate in terms of the popular vote since Theodore Roosevelt in the 1912 election." I don't think this is necessary since the article is about Bush's campaign, not Perot's.
 * ✅ Removed.


 * "It was a popularly believed that Perot was" Delete a


 * "Bush's re-election campaign manager" managers


 * "Clinton's transition team consisted largely of individuals who had worked on his presidential campaign.[157] He named Warren Christopher as head of his transition team." I don't think this is necessary because the article's about Bush's campaign, not Clinton's. There are more sentences about Clinton's transition team in this section that can be removed.


 * "Shortly after leaving office, in 1994, Bush's oldest son George W. Bush was elected the governor of Texas. He was re-elected governor in 1998, with his younger brother Jeb Bush being elected governor of Florida.[165]" Again, I don't think this is necessary because it's GHW Bush's campaign, although the sons were part of the campaign so it's a judgment call.
 * Initially I didn't created the aftermath section, but it was suggested to me by a user (suggestions) I think that as both Jeb and George W. were part of campaign, it is worth mentioning about their gubernatorial campaigns. Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 04:25, 11 June 2021 (UTC)


 * "they wrote, "Bush would go so far" which Bush were they talking about?
 * ✅ George Herbert Walker Bush.


 * "He supported Jeb Bush's 2016 presidential campaign, but when he failed to win the nomination, he refused to endorse Donald Trump and voted for Bill Clinton's wife and Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton." This sentence isn't necessary and it trails too far from the article's 1992 campaign focus.
 * ✅ Removed.

That's it! Let me know if there are any questions above that I missed. Z1720 (talk) 18:12, 10 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi @ Thanks a lot for your comprehensive peer review comments for the article. I have resolved all the concerns. The article is surely better than what is was. Just a question, "In your view, is this article ready for GAN? Do you believe that it has reasonable chances of meeting the GA criteria?" Thanks! Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 04:25, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
 * I think the article is ready for GAN. Z1720 (talk) 21:49, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Comment by Buidhe

 * Do 1 thing and change the first sentence. It is quite repetitive; I'm going to bold everything that was repeated: "George H. W. Bush's 1992 presidential campaign was an unsuccessful re-election campaign for George H. W. Bush and his running mate Dan Quayle as president and vice president of the United States." Instead, rewrite per MOS:BOLDAVOID to remove duplication. Something like, "In 1992, George H. W. Bush and Dan Quayle ran an unsuccessful re-election campaign for president and vice president of the United States" (t &#183; c)  buidhe  16:05, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
 * ✅ Changed the first line. Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 16:15, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Comment by Anish631

 * Add more hyperlinks, people such as Ross Perot and others should be hyperlinked, other than that I'm not sure. I'll take a look at other presidential campaign wikipedia's for reference but for the most part it seems good. Anish631 (talk) 00:26, 15 June 2021 (UTC)Anish631