Jump to content

Wikipedia:Featured article review/Jean Schmidt/archive1

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following is an archived discussion of a featured article review. Please do not modify it. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page or at Wikipedia talk:Featured article review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was removed 21:06, 18 September 2007.

Jean Schmidt

[edit]

Review commentary

[edit]
User:PedanticallySpeaking, User:John Broughton notified. WP U.S. Congress, WP Biography notified.

This article got a spurt of attention prior to this politician's election, but now it has suffered major linkrot, even for the few in-line references that still exist. Naturally, some of these material dealing with that time period can undergo compression now that the heat is off and 20/20 hindsight kicks in and provides some perspective and maturity about what will still be Important one or two years later. Also, a very large section of "notes" that were links to news articles has just been dumped in the Talk page.--SallyForth123 23:57, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please notify relevant editors and Projects with {{subst:FARMessage|Jean Schmidt}} and leave a message here about notifications, per the instructions at WP:FAR. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:10, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • I note that PedanticallySpeaking declares himself on his userpage to be wikibonked and that he has been inactive for several months. If this article remains FA, I suggest, because it is a BLP, that its talk page get a {{maintained}} tag on its talk page with at least one active user listed.--SallyForth123 01:07, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the notification. I think the article is too long by half, that it's not a particularly important article at this point, and that the linkrot significantly complicates the matter. And I have other commitments, so I hope someone(s) with more time and energy is(are) willing to work on the article. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 01:06, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

FARC commentary

[edit]
Suggested FA criteria concerns are reference quality (1c and 2d), focus (4), and images (3). Marskell 06:56, 26 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • How did this get to be a FA?
    • "two months into her first term"—At the top. Problem is, her term is not defined in chronological terms until later.
    • MOS breach: logical punctuation required for quotes. It's not even consistently wrong through the text.
    • MOS breach: "four-year career"—with the hyphen.
    • "hurting its tax base"—Is that the right verb?
    • "The two also made joint appearances on WCET-TV's Forum on 28 July and WKRC-TV's Newsmakers on 31 July.[19][20][21][22][23][24][25]"—Are all of those references necessary? Looks so nice visually.
    • Stubby paras.
    • Unencyclopedic subtitles, especially in "Special general election" (whatever that is): they read like a policial brochure.
    • Inadequate referencing, e.g., "Schmidt repaid the lobbyist for the cost of the entertainment. Her spokesman told The Columbus Dispatch "Jean specifically asked if this was a reportable gift. We immediately corrected it by paying the full price of the tickets." Her former colleague Raussen blamed Colby. "Here we have a lobbyist who was extremely sloppy."
    • Overall, disjointed. It's the kind of effect you'd get from politically motivated visitors to the site who are out to sanitise the article. Tony 12:19, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article review. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_review/Jean_Schmidt/archive1&oldid=1084313087"