Wikipedia:Peer review/Robert F. Kennedy assassination/archive1

===Robert F. Kennedy assassination===


 * A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style; it can be found on the automated peer review page for May 2008.
 * A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style; it can be found on the automated peer review page for May 2008.

This peer review discussion has been closed. I've listed this article for peer review because over the past few weeks, this article has been extensively edited to restore balance and to adhere to WP:FRINGE and WP:DUE. The article is now well-referenced and substantial, and I think it might be worth looking to GA review with a view to improving this significantly afterwards. What we will need to know in advance is of issues that people can still spot with the article; as anyone looking at the edit history can see, I'm far too involved to make an objective assessment, and I would greatly appreciate all advice that can be offered.

Thanks, Fritzpoll (talk) 21:48, 13 May 2008 (UTC) :Note: Because of its length, this peer review is not transcluded. It is still open and located at Peer review/.

Ruhrfisch comments: I am not an expert on the topic, but this reads well and seems pretty well done. I have some suggestions for improvement: Hope this helps. If my comments are useful, please consider peer reviewing an article, especially one at Peer review/backlog (which is how I found this article). Yours, Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 02:19, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
 * The lead is good - my rule of thumb is that every header should be mentioned in the lead somehow, so the Media and the 1968 Election outcome sections are not apparently in the lead. See WP:LEAD
 * Done Fritzpoll (talk) 14:21, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Also per WP:WEIGHT and WP:LEAD, is there a bit too much emphasis on alternate theories in the lead (at least as the article and lead are now written)? Your call
 * Agreed, reduced to one sentence. Done Fritzpoll (talk) 14:21, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Per WP:CITE, refs generally come at the very end of the sentence or at least after punctuation. So as one example of several ...despite his attempts at introducing anti-poverty and anti-discrimination legislation[2] and opposition to military action in Vietnam. would be despite his attempts at introducing anti-poverty and anti-discrimination legislation and opposition to military action in Vietnam.[2] Ditto for Over the following week, NBC devoted 55 hours to the shooting and aftermath... and others.
 * Took a while, but I think I have fixed all of these Fritzpoll (talk) 14:58, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Article is generally well referenced, but every paragraph, every statistic, every direct quote, and every extraordinary claim needs a reference - especially in a potentially controversial article like this. So, for example: He took office on January 3, 1965. and Following a series of electoral battles for convention delegates, Kennedy was still in second place after the California primary, with 393 delegates compared to Hubert Humphrey's 561. and There were no police at the Ambassador Hotel and security around Kennedy was so thin that when he finished speaking, he was able to reach over the podium to shake hands with members of the crowd. and Three men who appear in video and photographs from the night of the assassination were positively identified by former colleagues and associates as former senior CIA officers who had worked together in 1963 at JMWAVE, the CIA's main anti-Castro station based in Miami. They were JMWAVE Chief of Operations David Morales, Chief of Maritime Operations Gordon Campbell and Chief of Psychological Warfare Operations George Joannides. ALL need refs, as examples (not a complete list)
 * Fixed these, added more refs to other statements and removed some unverified but unnecessary info - think I caught all of them Fritzpoll (talk) 14:58, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I would think that "the picture of Kennedy and Romero became the iconic image of the assassination...by Life photographer Bill Eppridge" would be OK to use in this article WP:FAIR USE
 * I'll make a discussion about it on the talkpage, and we'll look into it Fritzpoll (talk) 14:22, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Provide context for the reader - see WP:PCR. So perhaps it could be Kennedy had been shot a total of three times: once behind ...
 * Done Fritzpoll (talk) 15:19, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Give units in both English and metric units - 1 inch for example. convert is useful here.
 * Done Fritzpoll (talk) 14:14, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I looked at a conspiracy theory site on the web and I think I would make it clearer in the Perpetrator section that no other person was charged, that the LA police and not the FBI did the investigation, etc.
 * Well, no other person had to be charged - he was arrested/detained at the scene, and I'm not sure it would help to add this to the text. Fritzpoll (talk) 15:01, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
 * OK, your call ;-) Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 02:47, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Would it make sense to give the location of the California State Prison?
 * Done Fritzpoll (talk) 15:00, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Per WP:HEAD, I think the article subheaders should not repeat what is in the headers above them, so under "Alternative theories", it would just be "CIA involvement" (already know it is a theory) and perhaps just "Second gunman".
 * Done Fritzpoll (talk) 15:00, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Why was it the only burial ever to take place there at night.[53][51]?
 * I'll do some research into it, but will leave this in place for now Fritzpoll (talk) 14:23, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Once sentence paragraphs should generally be combined with other paragraphs or perhaps expanded - example After the assassination, Congress altered the mandate of the Secret Service to include protection of presidential candidates.[54]
 * Expanded with a new reference Fritzpoll (talk) 15:16, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I would attribute this  It therefore seems unlikely that Kennedy could have secured the nomination... as something like Noted historian Michael Beschloss wrote that it therefore seems unlikely that Kennedy could have secured the nomination... or something similar.
 * So attributed :) Fritzpoll (talk) 15:16, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Refs need more information in some cases - for example internet refs should have url, title, publisher, author if known (and the Time and Newsweek articles should have authors, for example) and date accessed. cite web and the other cite templates should help.
 * Oddly, some didn't seem to have authors, but I'll go over and check them again Fritzpoll (talk) 15:16, 18 May 2008 (UTC)