Talk:Alaska Mental Health Enabling Act

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by SandyGeorgia (talk | contribs) at 16:31, 28 January 2023 (→‎WP:URFA/2020: on my way). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Featured articleAlaska Mental Health Enabling Act is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on January 16, 2008.
Did You Know Article milestones
DateProcessResult
August 12, 2007Good article nomineeListed
August 25, 2007Featured article candidatePromoted
January 16, 2008Today's featured articleMain Page
Did You Know A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on February 23, 2007.
The text of the entry was: Did you know ...that the Alaska Mental Health Enabling Act of 1956 was said by opponents to be part of a Communist, Catholic, Jewish or psychiatric conspiracy to set up concentration camps in Alaska for political prisoners?
Current status: Featured article

Scientology's contribution shortened

As Scientology is only one of very many dubious groups who have an opinion on this matter, I suggest it's "contribution" be condensed. Collideascope (talk) 22:23, 2 June 2019 (UTC) Collideascope[reply]

I'm reviewing this article as part of WP:URFA/2020, an effort to ensure that old featured articles continue to meet the criteria. A few concerns: There are several places in need of citations, and additional sources – e.g. this 1980 article and chapter 4 of this 2014 book – may need to be incorporated to satisfy the comprehensiveness criterion. The articles also contains a large number of lengthy quotations, and while that's fine to a point (I'm a pretty liberal quoter myself), I feel it's a bit excessive here, in terms of both style and copyright. Finally, the Scientology section relies heavily on sources associated with Scientology rather than third-party ones, and that gives rise to synthesis/original research concerns. If third-party sources are discussing the Scientology connection, they should be cited, and if they aren't, then the section is likely undue and should be trimmed or removed. Looks like the article needs a bit of a tune-up to continue to meet the FA criteria; if it isn't brought back up to standard, it may be listed at WP:FAR, where editors will consider whether to delist it. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 08:35, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I axed the scientology section but other issues are still outstanding. (t · c) buidhe 05:02, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Dated inflation numbers
  • I can't find the actual Act, so unsure if OR is present in the description of it Details section.
  • Unattributed opinion
  • p or pp for plural?

I stopped after I hit the uncited, unattributed vociferous. The problems mentioned by EW are present in spades. Heading to FAR next. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:31, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]