This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Socialism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of socialism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SocialismWikipedia:WikiProject SocialismTemplate:WikiProject Socialismsocialism articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
Obiously this man didn't run for VP in 2000 if he died in 1989. At first I thought that this was vandalism but apparently it was in the original article and just a mistake. I have tried to correct it. Rlquall21:23, 26 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Copy editing needed (see below). Structure of article needs improvement, in particular, descriptions of the subject's life do not flow chronologically, but jump back and forth across multiple periods. There's one sentence about Hoopes' life after the 1956 presidential nomination, yet he lives until 1989...seems a very large gap.
First paragraph: uses "served" twice (and used again in second paragraph, third sentence)
Second paragraph, second sentence: uses "multiple" twice
Second paragraph, second sentence: repeats role as chair of the party, but this is already mentioned in the first paragraph
Second paragraph, third sentence: use of "presidential" four times
"Hoopes conducted the last presidential campaigns of the Socialist Party of America" ― this is ambiguous, what does conducted here mean? Ran the campaign or was the candidate? (if the latter, this is already mentioned in the sentence before). Generally, use of "last" would mean a singular event ― was the 1956 election the last? In this case 1952 and 1956 cannot both be last.
"He briefly joined the Social Democratic Federation in the 1930s before returning to the Socialist Party and later joined the Socialist Party USA after the dissolution of the Socialist Party." This sentence covers an almost 40 year period ...I'm not sure mentioning the SDF is that significant that it needs inclusion in the lead.
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.
2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).
The difficulty here is that the article at present givens no indication of what he actually believed in or supported. There is not a single indication of a policy position he took, a political view he held. To mention just a few points: He served in the Pennsylvania State Assembly for three terms - what did he do there? (details are readily available; child labour legislation, opposition to draft legislation inimical to workers' interests). Hoopes was involved in one of the most important splits in the US left politics in the 1930s and also part of one of the most important unity process in post-war US left politics, yet the article gives no indication of his role or views of these significant political events, that subsequently shaped in important ways New Deal politics in the 1930s and the New Left int eh 1960s, respectively.
This problem with the lack of 'politics' in the article stems from the over-reliance on contemporary newspaper reports to provide information about him (according to my count, 27 of the 33 citations are of this nature). As such, sources which present an overall or analytical assessment are lacking. It's a very noticeable absence that J Paul Henderson's biography of Hoopes is not cited once in the article. Other works which could offer the necessary political perspective and context which would be useful: Carole Boehm's 1973 Master's Thesis ("Darlington Hoopes, Sr. -- Radical?"), Kenneth Hendrickson's discussion of the rise and fall of the Socialist Party administration of Reading, PA in the 1930s [1][2]. Even general histories covering the Socialist Party, such as Jack Ross' (2015) "The Socialist Party of America: A Complete History", would be a good reference point for context.
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
6.Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
somewhat limited, but understand the difficulty in finding images. This 1952 election poster is possibly public domain, an addition like that would be very good for the article. While not necessary for GA status, adding alt-text is worthwhile for accessibility purposes.
7. Overall assessment.
Darlington Hoopes is a fascinating figure in US history and emblematic of the Socialist Party's greatest strengths, but also its most profound weaknesses. He's deserving of strong coverage and it is a worthy effort to get this to GA status. I hope the review proves helpful in future efforts with the article. Regards, --Goldsztajn (talk) 02:47, 9 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Goldsztajn: Just wanted to let you know that the nominator, Jon698, has been inactive for several weeks. See this discussion on his user talk, concerning my review of one of his other articles. If you haven't started reviewing yet, I'd suggesting postponing it until we figure out what to do with his outstanding nominations. Edge3 (talk) 23:39, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
