Talk:Robert Ford (politician)/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

This is a biography of a living person, so it needs to be verifiable and accurate - it appears to meet this objective.

Is it reasonably well written?
A. Prose quality:

B. MoS compliance:
Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
A. References to sources:

B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
These are mostly newspaper reports, are all newspaper articles reliable?

C. No original research:
Is it broad in its coverage?
A. Major aspects:

B. Focused:
Is it neutral?
Fair representation without bias:
Is it stable?
No edit wars, etc:
Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
Surprisingly for a live person, there are no photographs of Robert Ford.
Overall:
Pass or Fail:

I'm passing this article as it has essentially all the necessary attributes required for GA-status, but there are scope for improvements.

The WP:lead is barely adequate and needs improving. Its OK as an introduction, but I would hardly describe "Originally involved in the civil rights movement, several of Ford's public statements and legislative proposals as senator attracted media attention and controversy. In 2009, he announced his intention to run for governor in 2010" as a good summary of what is in the article.
Surprisingly for a politician there are no photographs, can't someone go and photograph him and load it onto wikipedia?
The article has some nice tables at the end on his Electoral history, its obvious that he won by a wide margin (except once when it went to a second ballot), but there is no comment whatsoever on these results.
Most of the references are from newspapers, can you believe what they write? Some non-newspaper references would be good.