Talk:Liberal Party (Utah): Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 02:57, 2 July 2009

Liberal Party (Utah) is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed.

This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on February 21, 2005.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
January 1, 2005	Featured article candidate	Promoted
September 16, 2006	Featured article review	Demoted

Current status: Former featured article

United States: Utah Unassessed

	United States portal 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. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	Utah portal This article is supported by WikiProject Utah.

Latter Day Saint movement Unassessed

	Latter Day Saint movement portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Latter Day Saint movement, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Mormonism and the Latter Day Saint movement 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.Latter Day Saint movementWikipedia:WikiProject Latter Day Saint movementTemplate:WikiProject Latter Day Saint movementLatter Day Saint movement articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Template:WikiProject Political Parties

older entries

Like many political parties of the time, the Liberal Party ran a newspaper, although unofficially. Godbe's Utah Magazine became the Mormon Weekly Tribune and in 1873 three anti-Mormon newcomers from Kansas bought it and it became the Party incumbents, citing fraud, refused to yield their positions even as U.S. Marshals authorized Tooele unexpectedly proved the closest that the Liberal Party got to sending a representative to Washington D.C. BIG HAIRY cock then two men started to lick shite of ya mams tits which went up a trannys ass hole

is on the page now. Please help it.

[Update:] I've reverted the page to the publishable version. Why the FUCK wasn't it protected? Vivacissamamente 10:40, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)

It's common to see some vandalism on articles from now and then. Don't worry too much, in fact vandalism in Wikipedia is known to be reverted with an average of 5 minutes according to a study. Instead of asking for protection, try listing the vandal's IP on Wikipedia:Vandalism in progress instead. - Mailer Diablo 10:52, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)

It was my understanding that Featured Articles linked to from the main page were to be protected to keep Wikipedia from looking like a hack job run by idiots. Vivacissamamente 10:57, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)

- - Images on the main page itself, yes. But subsequent links to articles, no. There will be many vandals targeting featured pages, but we still have to give other users who may want to make legitimate edits a chance. - Mailer Diablo 11:08, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Issues

This was a great article at the time it was featured, but times have changed. By current standards, it isn't particularly comprehensive, and essentially lacks references (the three general ones at the bottom notwithstanding). Is there anyone around who'd be willing to get it up to current standards? It'd be a shame to have to nominate it for WP:FARC. Ambi 10:22, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

But the article hasn't really changed much since it was made a FA...what's the problem? JonMoore 20:59, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The FA standards have increased. Significantly. Rebecca 08:25, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

So there's not a grandfather clause? That's like giving someone a doctorate degree, then, because the field they got a degree in has changed, taking it away. — JonMoore 17:26, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Let's see:

It is well written, comprehensive, factually accurate, neutral, stable and cites references. It is concise and is an appropriate length for the subject. It seems to meet all the standards. — JonMoore 17:31, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I

Clarification request

In the first two paragraphs of the Origins section, it mentions "key" Godbeites. Who were they, specifically?
"Godbeites believed they should reform Utah and the LDS Church to adopt more politically progressive policies" what politically progressive policies are we talking about?

--Lethargy 23:24, 17 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 17: / Line 17: @@
 {{WikiProject Utah|class=Start|importance=High}}
 {{LDSproject}}
-{{WikiProject Political Parties|class=|importance=}}
+{{WikiProject Political Parties|class=|importance=High}}
 ==older entries==