Talk:Douglas Bruce/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 02:14, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

GAN on hold

This is my first review since May 2009 of a GAN, so bear with me. I have reviewed this article according to the requirements of the GA criteria and have placed the article on hold until the following issues are addressed. As you address each issue, either strike through the statement/place a check mark next to the issue and state how you addressed it (if necessary). If you disagree with a particular issue, state your rationale for doing so after the issue in question so a compromise can be reached.

Although it is not required by the criteria (so will not need to be completed for the article to pass as a GA), it would be beneficial to add alt text for the images for disabled readers and those with limited Internet connections. In addition, it would also be helpful to include Persondata.
Added persondata; attempted (unsuccessfully) to add alt-text, but I couldn't seem to make it work with the photo in the infobox. -- Sethant (talk) 05:09, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
For the lead, at most it should be four paragraphs. Condense the first and second paragraphs together. For further guidance, see WP:LEAD.
I instead expanded the first sentence, and combined the second and third paragraphs, and rewrote some parts; I think it reads better now (in addition to being only four paragraphs. Let me know what you think. -- Sethant (talk) 05:09, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
"Running with the campaign slogan "Specifics, Not Safe Generalities," Bruce ran what a local newspaper described as "something of an anomaly—a law and order primary campaign by a Democrat."" All quotes should have a citation that directly follows it. I saw a few other occurrences throughout the article (including in the "Conflicts with county staff and commissioners" section), be sure to fix them.
The entire paragraph is sourced by the link at the end of the paragraph (in that case, [7]). I've always been taught that, when multiple sentences rely on the same reference (in particular, when an entire paragraph relies on a single reference, as is the case in the instances you cite, that the citation should go at the end of that paragraph. (see, for instance, halfway down [1]. Are there places within the manual of style that state otherwise? -- Sethant (talk) 05:09, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
"In 2003, Bruce announced that he intended to sell his rental properties in order to devote more time to political activism,[14] but was cited by Colorado Springs for keeping dilapidated..." Link to dilapidation, as readers may be unfamiliar with the term. In addition, this paragraph seems out of place (as the next section focuses on his 1980s work). See if there is a better area within the article this would fit.
I've segmented the real estate stuff off into its own section, I think that makes things a little clearer. -- Sethant (talk) 05:38, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The last paragraph in the "State Senate campaigns" section also seems out of place. Consider rewording some of the section titles or move this to a new area.
I've moved that paragraph down to the (retitled) "Activism in Colorado Springs" section, where it probably fits better. -- Sethant (talk) 05:09, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The last sentence in the "Policy positions" section is only a single sentence. Either expand on this or incorporate it into another paragraph to improve the flow of the article. Fix any other one or two-sentence paragraphs in the article (for example, there's one in the "2007 House appointment" section and a few in the "Legislative agenda" section)
Done, along with some mild reconfiguration of section headers. -- Sethant (talk) 03:09, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
"As of 2009, Bruce held some 40,000 copies of the constitution, bought and paid for by his nonprofit, in his garage, with the goal of giving one to every graduating high school senior in Colorado." Can this be updated for 2010 if possible?
It's not clear to me whether the copies were distributed, so I've reworked the sentence a little, and added the group's website as a reference (it mentions the constitution project). -- Sethant (talk) 05:37, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
"Bruce was a stickler..." It would probably be best reword this, the phrasing doesn't sound encyclopedic.
That whole sentence bothers me a little bit; it seems very petty to mention it in a Wikipedia article, so I've just cut the whole bit about what Bruce prefers to be called. -- Sethant (talk) 05:17, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
"Bruce was also the subject of several criminal citations — first in May 2006, stemming from charges that he campaigned against against a tax increase for the Falcon Fire Protection..." Duplicate "against".
Fixed. -- Sethant (talk) 05:17, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
"A trial was eventually held after paperwork errors,[83][84][85], a tainted jury pool,[86][87],..." To remain consistent throughout the article, the commas should be removed after the citations.
Fixed. -- Sethant (talk) 05:17, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
"On January 24, the full House of Representatives voted 62-1 to censure Bruce." Out of curiosity, was his the dissenting vote?
No; it was Rep. Kevin Lundberg. That's mentioned in the more detailed sub-article Colorado House career of Douglas Bruce linked to by the main article. If you think it's important for clarity, I can mention it in the main article -- not doing so was simply a judgment call of what detail to include in the more general article. -- Sethant (talk) 05:17, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Reword the intro sentence of one of the last two paragraphs in the "Legislative agenda" section, as both start with "Bruce also". It may be beneficial to just combine the two paragraphs.
Done. -- Sethant (talk) 05:37, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Can anything be added about his personal life such as family? It may be a beneficial section to include the information about the rental properties.
Bruce is and has been unmarried and pretty much single, as indicated in the infobox (I did add a citation for that.) There was once minor media attention brought to an online dating profile of his, but I didn't feel that merited mention in the article. -- Sethant (talk) 04:01, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Are there any other relevant images that can be added to the article? If none are available for Bruce, see if any pertain to the topics mentioned in the article.
Added a pic of the Colorado House chamber (where the infamous kicking incident occurred), the El Paso County house (an issue during his Commissioner tenure), and Mark Waller (who defeated Bruce in the 2008 Republican primary). -- Sethant (talk)
Try and fix the dead links within the article. The Internet Archive may be able to help.
Done! -- Sethant (talk) 04:01, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Altogether, this article was informative on the topic and is very well-sourced. Most of the above issues shouldn't be too difficult to address, but if you have any questions on them, please let me know. I have left the article on hold for seven days for the issues to be addressed. If they are fixed in this time, I will pass the article. If not, the article may be failed and can be renominated at WP:GAN. If necessary to address the above issues, and progress is being made, an extension may be allowed. If you have any questions or when you are done, let me know on my talk page and I'll get back to you as soon as I can. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 02:14, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

GA passed

Good job with addressing the above issues. I went through the article and made some minor changes, please look them over. For the citation placement (raised in issue 3), although most university papers and books use only one cite per paragraph, they have the benefit of not being constantly changed. It's helpful to include the citation directly after quotes (and other statements), as other users over time could include new information that fits between two statements from the same source. It's better to oversource than to have to worry about what statement is covered by which source. Besides that, I believe the article meets the GA criteria and have passed the article.

Also, to anyone that is reading this review, please consider reviewing an article or two at WP:GAN to help with the very large backlog. Instructions can be found here. Each new reviewer that helps to review articles will help to reduce the time that articles wait to be reviewed. If you are new to reviewing and want to familiar yourself with the process, study the GA criteria, look at other editors' reviews, and leave any questions you have at Wikipedia talk:Good article nominations if you need feedback while performing a review.

Keep up the good work, and I hope that you continue to bring articles up to good article status. If anyone disagrees with this review, an alternate opinion can be sought at Good article reassessment. If you have any further questions, let me know on my talk page and I'll get back to you as soon as I can. I have updated the article history to reflect this review. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 04:50, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]