Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Paul Hackett/archive1

Paul Hackett

Self nom. Article on the Ohio lawyer who yesterday narrowly lost the Congressional race in the Second District to Jean Schmidt. Photos, references. Thorough account of the campaign. PedanticallySpeaking 16:59, August 3, 2005 (UTC)

Support--well-referenced and thorough. Meelar (talk) 18:13, August 3, 2005 (UTC)

Thank you, Meelar. PedanticallySpeaking 14:56, August 6, 2005 (UTC)

Oppose-- Never a big fan of FAC that are a subject less then a week old, here we are about a subject that is a day old. Lets wait at least a week until we see what happens with the offical election results. If nothing changes I see no reason for a support if it has followed the correct FAC procedure. PPGMD 19:36, 3 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

For the record, the article was started in May or June and is not "less than a week old." PedanticallySpeaking 14:56, August 6, 2005 (UTC)

I think PPGMD is refering to the election, not the article itself. --ZeWrestler ^Talk 18:08, 8 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Article was created on June 8, 2005. What "correct procedure" do you refer to? PedanticallySpeaking 16:10, August 9, 2005 (UTC)

Object. The images Image:PaulHackettinUniform.jpg, Image:PaulHackett and family.jpg, Image:JeanSchmidtportrait.gif are claimed as fair use. Wikipedia is not just an encyclopedia, it is a free content encyclopedia, and as such, images under "fair use" and other non-free licenses should be avoided if at all possible. If a fair use image must be used, the image description page must list the source or current copyright holder for the image, and an explanation of why the image can be used under fair use must be provided for each page the image is used on. --Carnildo 19:57, 3 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

So your opposition is based solely on the photographs and not the content? Would an article without photos get your support vote? PedanticallySpeaking 14:56, August 6, 2005 (UTC)

No photos, or whichever one photo you think is most representative of the subject if you follow the rules for using fair use images at Wikipedia:Fair use and Wikipedia:Image description page#Fair use rationale. I can't promise it'll get my support, as photos are just the first thing I check. --Carnildo 04:17, 7 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose - The article looks good to me, but the election is still playing out. this article could drastically change still. Also, i'd prefer it to have a peer review first. --ZeWrestler ^Talk 21:14, 3 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- How could it change? Schmidt won by a clear margin and Hackett has conceded. PedanticallySpeaking 14:56, August 6, 2005 (UTC)
  - The effects of how close this election was still have yet to be seen. An e-mail sent out by the DNC says now that the congressional republicans are worried because of how close this election was. overall, my main thought is run it through a peer review at least once.--ZeWrestler ^Talk 18:07, 8 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]