Wikipedia talk:WikiProject United States presidential elections/Archive 3

Coordinators' working group
Hi! I'd like to draw your attention to the new WikiProject coordinators' working group, an effort to bring both official and unofficial WikiProject coordinators together so that the projects can more easily develop consensus and collaborate. This group has been created after discussion regarding possible changes to the A-Class review system, and that may be one of the first things discussed by interested coordinators.

All designated project coordinators are invited to join this working group. If your project hasn't formally designated any editors as coordinators, but you are someone who regularly deals with coordination tasks in the project, please feel free to join as well. &mdash; Delievered by §hepBot  ( Disable )  on behalf of the WikiProject coordinators' working group at 06:53, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Article alerts
This is a notice to let you know about Article alerts, a fully-automated subscription-based news delivery system designed to notify WikiProjects and Taskforces when articles are entering Articles for deletion, Requests for comment, Peer review and other workflows (full list). The reports are updated on a daily basis, and provide brief summaries of what happened, with relevant links to discussion or results when possible. A certain degree of customization is available; WikiProjects and Taskforces can choose which workflows to include, have individual reports generated for each workflow, have deletion discussion transcluded on the reports, and so on. An example of a customized report can be found here.

If you are already subscribed to Article Alerts, it is now easier to report bugs and request new features. We are also in the process of implementing a "news system", which would let projects know about ongoing discussions on a wikipedia-wide level, and other things of interest. The developers also note that some subscribing WikiProjects and Taskforces use the  parameter, but forget to give a link to their alert page. Your alert page should be located at "Wikipedia:PROJECT-OR-TASKFORCE-HOMEPAGE/Article alerts". Questions and feedback should be left at Wikipedia talk:Article alerts.

Message sent by User:Addbot to all active wiki projects per request, Comments on the message and bot are welcome here.

Thanks. — Headbomb {{{sup|ταλκ}}κοντριβς – WP Physics} 09:48, 15 March, 2009 (UTC)

Electoral Map 1864
I am not sure if this is the correct place to post this, but I noticed the electoral map in the article United States presidential election, 1864 has a mistake. The state of Oregon should be shown for Lincoln, not McClellan. Someone made a note of it on the talk page about two months ago and then I noticed the error as well and put a note on there. I have no idea how to fix it, but maybe someone can redo the map. Thanks. Davidpdx (talk) 07:28, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

Hillary Rodham Clinton GAR
Hillary Rodham Clinton has been nominated for a good article reassessment. Articles are typically reviewed for one week. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to good article quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status will be removed from the article. Reviewers' concerns are here.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 22:38, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

George W. Bush GA Sweeps: On Hold
I have reviewed George W. Bush for GA Sweeps to determine if it still qualifies as a Good Article. In reviewing the article I have found several issues, which I have detailed here. Since the article falls under the scope of this project, I figured you would be interested in contributing to further improve the article. Please comment there to help the article maintain its GA status. If you have any questions, let me know on my talk page and I'll get back to you as soon as I can. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 22:10, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

GA Reassessment of George Washington
I have done a GA Reassessment of the George Washington article as part of the GA Sweeps project. I have found the article to need work on referencing. My review is here. I am notifying all the interested projects that this article is on hold for a week pending work that needs to be done. I don't think it will require too much to satisfy the GA Criteria and I sincerely hope that someone will step forward and take this project on. It would be a shame to delist what is in all senses but one, a good article. If you have any questions please contact me on my talk page. H1nkles (talk) 21:12, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Main articles for candidates
Should we cover the article for the main candidate? I think that maybe we should just cover their "campaign" article or section. What is everybody's opinion on this matter? --William S. Saturn (talk) 19:05, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for asking, I'd lean (weakly) toward keeping the main candidate articles, because better to have a wider scope; they can have a default lower priority of course. But I haven't been much involved lately so see what else gets said. JJB 20:10, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure what "cover" means. But in the past this project dealt with aspects of the candidates' main articles beyond just their campaign sections – such as getting rid of all the controversies sections and subarticles.  Also, plenty of historical presidential candidates' main articles don't have even campaign sections, e.g. John C. Breckinridge and Samuel J. Randall and William H. Crawford and many others.  Wasted Time R (talk) 20:19, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Perhaps then we should add sections to these articles. --William S. Saturn (talk) 21:44, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
 * A lot of these articles are short or are focused on other bio points, and adding a section for a two- or three-sentence description of a campaign would throw the article out of whack. Wasted Time R (talk) 21:56, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
 * That's true. --William S. Saturn (talk) 21:59, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Deletion review for Straw Polls article
I was not aware that the Straw polls article was deleted, and I am requesting that its deletion be reviewed here. --William S. Saturn (talk) 22:01, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Categories confusion
Take a look at Category:United States presidential campaigns. Somewhere under here should be all the "FFF LLL presidential campaign, YYYY" campaign articles. The 2008 ones are grouped by year under Category:Campaigns in the United States presidential election, 2008, with Dem, Rep, Libertarian, etc all together. The ones before 2008 are not grouped by year, but instead are grouped by party into Category:Democratic Party (United States) campaigns and Category:Republican Party (United States) campaigns ... but some of them are also directly in Category:United States presidential campaigns as well. To add to the confusion, a few 2008 ones are also in Category:Democratic Party (United States) campaigns.

Questions:
 * Do we want to subcategorize presidential campaign articles by year, by party, or both?
 * Are the party categories just for presidential campaign articles, or for other offices too? But we don't (and shouldn't, I would argue) have any personal campaign articles for offices other than president.  In that case, the categories should be renamed, e.g. Category:Democratic Party (United States) presidential campaigns.   Wasted Time R (talk) 02:06, 13 June 2009 (UTC)


 * I believe they should be categorized by year, for the most part, especially since I am devising a plan that will make creating campaign articles more efficiently. Perhaps the campaigns by party should be populated with gubernatorial, mayoral, etc campaigns. --William S. Saturn (talk) 02:09, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I, too believe they should be categorized by year. I also agree with the suggestion that campaigns by party should grouped according to the specific type of campaign.--JayJasper (talk) 20:01, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Watchlist
Keep an eye on this, sometimes vandalism goes unnoticed for days. --William S. Saturn (talk) 04:51, 22 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Hey, look on the bright side, John Ensign presidential campaign, 2012 and Mark Sanford presidential campaign, 2012 will now never have to be watched ;-)  Wasted Time R (talk) 01:33, 25 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Good point. --William S. Saturn (talk) 04:34, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Articles in our scope
Since I created WikiProject United States presidential elections/Watchlist, I don't see any need for the "articles in our scope" section on the project page. Any objections to the removal of the chart and its replacement with a link? --William S. Saturn (talk) 05:05, 25 June 2009 (UTC)


 * That's a good idea, more user-friendly. OK by me.--JayJasper (talk) 23:24, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Geraldine Ferraro FAC
FYI, the Geraldine Ferraro article has been nominated for Featured Article status. Support/opposition/comments welcome at Featured article candidates/Geraldine Ferraro/archive1. Wasted Time R (talk) 01:11, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

"Mock" candidates
Should "mock" candidates such as Stephen Colbert, Bob Backlund, Pat Paulsen or Joe Walsh fall under the scope of this project? --William S. Saturn (talk) 04:02, 4 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Pat Paulsen perhaps, since his 'campaigns' for president became what he is best known for. All the others are much better known for their regular careers.  Backlund I think staged a serious run for some office (not president) after his wrestling career was over.  Wasted Time R (talk) 04:20, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Was the Republican congressional nominee in CT-01 in 2000, lost big to the Dem incumbent. Wasted Time R (talk) 04:35, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Opinions welcome
I have a Peer Review page open for Democratic Party (United States) presidential primaries, 1964 currently. Due to the rather unique circumstances of the race, I wasn't sure, for example, how to represent the race in the infobox. There are also some other things I mentioned on the Peer Review page. It might also interest participants of the project to know that the person who reviewed the article said it looked near FAC quality. :)

I'm currently working on a rewrite/expansion of the accompanying Republican race at User:Recognizance/Republicans. Quite a bit more competitive as well as historically significant. If anyone wants to collaborate and/or critique my work, please be my guest. Recognizance (talk) 09:16, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Thomas Jefferson GAR notification
Thomas Jefferson has been nominated for a good article reassessment. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to good article quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status will be removed from the article. Reviewers' concerns are here.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 20:42, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Bob Dole Article
Yesterday an IP commented on the information in the infobox in the Bob Dole Article. Specifically that a period of time that he was majority leader is listed under minority leader. I took a look and as far as I can see, he's correct. I took a stab at fixing it, and realized I don't know enough about infoboxes to get it right. So I hoped someone here might be able to take a look, verify that it does need correcting, and fix it. Thanks.--Cube lurker (talk) 23:06, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Hones Abe FA
I'm trying to get Abraham Lincoln up to FA, and his article is within the scope of your wikiproject. It's a big job, but the article is in pretty good shape. Anyone want to help? Drop by the talk page if you're interested. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) (contribs) 04:26, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

John Marshall GAR notification
John Marshall has been nominated for a good article reassessment. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to good article quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status will be removed from the article. Reviewers' concerns are here.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 07:38, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Voter turnout article needs work
The article Voter turnout in the United States presidential elections, while very helpful, needs lots of work. As a fan of statistics and elections, I created this article last year, but it hasn't been worked on much. One problem, as I'm reviewing this article again, is that the numbers for VAP and total turnout seem different depending on where you look. I based the numbers for the article on the data here: http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/data/turnout.php but other sources site different numbers altogether, and they're never the same. I just edited the table to use the numbers used in our articles here on Wikipedia for each election. The table also needs to be updated with pre-1960 data. So the questions is, what is the definitive source of this information? Where to get the most correct numbers for the turnout and VAP? And should VEP be used instead, or perhaps in addition? Also, the article states "Currently, there are no data for the elections held from 1789 to 1820", which is not true; articles for these elections contain turnout information. So, if anyone would be willing to assist me in bettering this article, I'd really appreciate that. Jmj713 (talk) 19:58, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

George W. Romney FAC
FYI, George W. Romney has been nominated for Featured Article status. Support/opposition/comments welcome at Featured article candidates/George W. Romney/archive1. Wasted Time R (talk) 17:49, 29 December 2009 (UTC)