Wikipedia:Peer review/Matthew Shepard/archive1

===Matthew Shepard===

This peer review discussion has been closed. I think there is some room for improvement to reach FA with this article, but I would like to see what everyone else thinks needs to be done to improve it. --Pinkkeith (talk) 15:44, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

It is still open and located at Peer review/Matthew Shepard/archive1.


 * Comments by Moni3

Hi, Pinkkeith. Yes, there is some work to be done on this article to get it to FA. I notice you are not a regular contributor to this article. Will you be the one working on these issues? It's not uncommon to work on an article for months to get it to FA.

My comments:


 * Do the perpetrators have their own links? I think they might. Link them in the lead.
 * The don't appear to have them, but seem to be requested to have an article. (See: McKinney for Aaron McKinney)
 * The lead should summarize the article as a whole. You'll have to expand the article, so you'll have to expand the lead to reflect what will be in the article. If it's not in the article, it should not be in the lead. Read WP:LEAD.

Background:
 * The first paragraph needs citations. Cite all the facts about where Shepard went to school.
 * This phrase "where it is said that he enjoyed travel" is not written well. If someone said it, say who said it and cite it. There was so much coverage about Shepard that this could be expanded. Try to form a picture of Shepard as a person who was more than his grisly death.
 * I omitted the sentence quoted. It came from his offical web site. --Pinkkeith (talk) 17:49, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Be watchful of passages that are copied from other sources. Rewrite them if they look like they're too close. You're coming in the middle of the article, so you have two jobs to do: clean up the article, and restructure it to make it better. You may have to go backwards a little bit in order to go forwards. --Moni3 (talk) 17:53, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

The attack:
 * Use police reports or initial reports in media, and state where the information came from. The stories of Henderson and McKinney changed, and have been refuted by their girlfriends, and refuted again.
 * Cite this: Still tied to the fence, Shepard was discovered eighteen hours later by a cyclist, who at first thought that Shepard was a scarecrow. Shepard was still alive, but in a coma, at the time of discovery.
 * Expand the reaction of Shepard's family, friends, and the town of Laramie immediately after the attack. I was living in Northern Colorado during this time, and it made news immediately, so there will be information to cull for this.
 * One-sentence paragraphs are unacceptable at FA, so expand what the perpetrators did and how they reacted.

The trial:
 * Gay panic defense does not need quotations with a link.
 * Remember, if there is a paragraph without a citation, find a citation for that paragraph. There is rarely such a thing as too many citations.

ABC's 20/20 Report:
 * Consider moving this to a subheading under "The attack".

Hate crime legislation proposed:
 * Expand this section considerably. Add, add, add. You need to cull every major newspaper during the time this occurred, and follow The New York Times, Washington Post, The Denver Post or Rocky Mountain News, and local Wyoming papers for coverage of the trial. I would also consult The Advocate, Time, and Newsweek for other in-depth stories. You'll do a lot of searching or time in the library.

Public reaction and the aftermath:
 * Same thing here. Add, add, add. Read the Manual of Style (if you can - it's quite long) for what is ideal in paragraph structure. Change the bulleted list of public responses to prose.

The list:
 * I would consider moving this to its own page. You may even be able to get it passed as a Featured List. But here on this article page it's distracting and not very aesthetically pleasing.

If you are going to take this task under your responsibility, I commend you. Work on what is suggested here at Peer Review. Nominate it for a Good Article when you think you can't possibly work on it any more. When it passes, ask the League of Copy Editors to check it for errors. Put it up again for Peer Review at WP:Biography and WP:LGBT. Seriously. Pester the hell out of people. Read this essay, which is quite amusing only because it's so accurate.

You can repsond here for clarification, or you may leave me messages on my talk page in the future if you wish for consultation or direction. I am willing to assist you in this. --Moni3 (talk) 16:15, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

I think taking the Matthew Shepard article to Good article nominations first would be a good idea. Cheers! Wassupwestcoast (talk) 16:26, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
 * GA first
 * I don't think it's ready for GA yet, but GA should be the a step or two before FA.--Moni3 (talk) 16:31, 18 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Yes, I agree. It isn't GA ready. Thank you Moni3 for the good and useful comment and suggestions. Cheers! Wassupwestcoast (talk) 16:33, 18 April 2008 (UTC)


 * I do agree that GA is a step before FA. My original post was I think it could make its way there easier then many articles I have seen out there. The first step to getting there is to request a review. Also, no, I haven't made any modifications to this article. I just thought I would drum up some people to look it over for myself and others to help improve this article. --Pinkkeith (talk) 16:51, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Hi Moni3, please use ==== GA first ==== and analogous if you want to introduce new subsections into this particular review. The way you did it ( == GA first == ), you managed to significantly mess up the peer review page (here). Unless you think that "Moni3" and "GA first" should really be top-level categories for review, alongside "Art", "History", "Natural Sciences" and the like. Thank you for your future cooperation! Markus Poessel (talk) 16:36, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
 * If I messed up something on the Wiki, I can finally sleep at night. Thank God. I've been awake for weeks. My sincerest apologies. --Moni3 (talk) 16:40, 18 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Sorry, my fault with the sub-headings. I've removed them. Cheers! Wassupwestcoast (talk) 16:54, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

I've removed the 'list' and created a new article: Cultural depictions of Matthew Shepard. Cheers! Wassupwestcoast (talk)
 * The list


 * Another interesting thing that can be added here is the alleged double standard about the excess coverage of Shepard's death and very little coverage of the murder of a gay teen named Jesse Dirkishing around the years of 98/99, as documented by Media Research Center. --Andrewlp1991 (talk) 03:10, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
 * While that is a valid point to make, it would be hard to put it in a biography about Shepard. That would be more appropriate in an article about media response to hate crimes. --Moni3 (talk) 12:17, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I've linked the Jesse Dirkishing article in the 'See also' section...which according to WP:LAYOUT is exactly where it should go: "subjects only peripherally related to the one in question". Cheers! Wassupwestcoast (talk) 16:00, 22 April 2008 (UTC)