Gregory R. Ball
 | This peer review discussion is closed. |
I noticed this stub about a fairly notable and colorful State Legislator and had serious concerns about NPOV and UNDUE regarding the controversy section. In researching him, I found a great deal of information and I've tried to include as much as is notable and covered by two or more publications. I would like to get the article to a point where it can be featured as a GA. Obviously it must be vetted for accuracy, POV, and to some extent, the prose. I look forward to hearing your comments and implementing them. MrPrada ( talk) 05:44, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
Carom
Well done so far. A few comments:
If you're aiming for featured status, I would expand the lead. It should provide an overview of the entire article.
Done I expanded it to the requisite 3 paragraphs for a 40k article
There's an image tacked on at the very bottom, it should really be incorporated into the body of the text somewhere.- Done The wikiquote was supposed to go there, and the image in the se ealso section.
- The links in the "see also" section should be incorporated into the main body of the text and the section should be removed.
- Question. Is this in the MoS? I've seen other articles (especially ones on the State Assembly) that have "list of members of the State Assembly" in a See Also section. I was assuming this was the standard for all of them, so I'll leave it for now unless I hear otherwise.
- No, it's not MOS. It's a convention that's arisen amongst the editors working on military history articles, so it's more of a preference than anything else. However, there is one MOS issue - articles linked in the main body of the article should not be re-linked in the "see also" section, so make sure not to duplicate any of them. Carom ( talk) 00:40, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
- A copy edit is needed, both to clean up some grammar, and to check for typos (like "chicken suite").
- Partially done. I'll submit it to the league of copywriters to double check my work.
There's a few places where I would use different wording - "Ball did not dispute that he ran hard for his seat" is an example of the kind of phrasing that should really be cleaned up.- Done
Hopefully these comments are helpful. Carom ( talk) 12:50, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
AndyZ
LA script has been used to generate a semi- automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style. If you would find such a review helpful, please click here.Thanks, APR t 20:47, 29 February 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Geometry guy ( talk • contribs)- Done
Rockfall
The "First term" section is enormous and hard to navigate. I notice that much of it is his position on various issues. Perhaps this could be moved to a separate section for better reference? Regardless, I feel that this needs breaking up into some sort of subdivision.- Done I split it up into four sections. I had originally planned on doing so, I guess I forgot, heh. :)
- Very well referenced, definitely up to scratch on that score.
- Thanks!
- Given that he is notable for his political career, I am curious as to how he comes under the military history project, but that is another matter...
- He was an Air Force Captain who worked in the White House. So far I haven't found too much data on that, but when I do I will expand the section. Its under MILHIST primarily for that reason.
In the Courage Cup section, there is no description of what the Courage Cup actually 'is'. That entire section could perhaps be expanded.- Done
- The media file after the 2006 election section: would it not be more appropriate to place this at the end of the article, as seems to be the norm with such audio quotes?
- Hmm, I wanted to place it as close as possible to the "Most dysfunctional legislature" section of the article. Is there an MoS for audio quotes?
Hope that is helpful. Rockfall ( talk) 15:29, 6 March 2008 (UTC)