Talk:August Palmisano

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Bruxton talk 16:32, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that when tavern operator August Palmisano was killed in a 1978 car bombing, authorities suspected organized crime in Milwaukee? Source: Blast victim was in Organized Crime
  • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Loybas Hill, California

Created by Lightburst (talk). Self-nominated at 21:11, 25 January 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/August Palmisano; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.

• Novice reviewer here.

New article created 2 days ago, which is certainly long enough and well sourced, copy-vio free and has no BLP issues. Great work on the article!

The hook is interesting, and the only issue I can see is that the cited source (ref 11, Kenosha news) doesn't explicitly verify the hook (Milwaukee Mafia) - it suggests that victim was in organised crime, and was the victim of rivalry between 'organised crime .. factions'. The link with named individuals is made in ref 1. 'my cousin was killed .. mob boss suspected'. This could be resolved by using a different link to the hook?

QPQ has been done. Chaiten1 (talk) 14:44, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

@Chaiten1: The words used over and in the Kenosha article and others is organized crime, I changed the hook to read "organized crime in Milwaukee". However the main suspect in the crime was the head of the Milwaukee Mafia Frank Balistrieri - you can see the claims in that Milwaukee Mafia article. You can read about it in the reference for that section of our article. They call Balistrieri a "very well known mafia boss".

Our article, August Palmisano we say: The main suspect in the bombing was the boss of the Milwaukee mafia, Frank Balistrieri. Undercover agent Gail Cobb reported that Balistrieri said, "He [August] was arrogant. He called me a name to my face. Now he has no skin". Balistrieri also reportedly told the agent that nobody ever survived to be a witness against him. Lightburst (talk) 03:46, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

@Chaiten1: Wondering of there is anything else you would like. If not the nomination needs a green tick. Lightburst (talk) 20:00, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Thank you - and sorry for the delay! Good to go for me.

Chaiten1 (talk)

GA Review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

This review is transcluded from Talk:August Palmisano/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Lightburst (talk · contribs) 04:21, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

Reviewer: Thebiguglyalien (talk · contribs) 06:16, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Hello! I'll review this within the next few days. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 06:16, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Lightburst, I've posted a review below. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 02:38, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

@Thebiguglyalien: Thank you very much for taking on the review. I am happy to make changes to help this become a good article. I had a chance to make edits last night and today, and I also rode out to the cemetery and started a commons category for the person. Lightburst (talk) 20:33, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

Lightburst, just a few more comments:

• Any source describing him as a mobster or being affiliated with the mob should work, but it needs to be stated explicitly and cited somewhere in the body. Done added a source and stated explicitly.
• The article still uses original research to go from quoting Balistrieri to interpreting what he might have meant. The article should just summarize the conclusions reached by the sources. Done removed hinting and left the information stand for readers to interpret
• Just looking at the Capital Times source, for example, there's more information about his previous legal troubles and about the explosion. I realize it's debatable whether these are true scope issues or just minor details, but I'm inclined to pay more attention to this given the length of the article. I suggest doing a once-over on a few of the major sources to WP:MINE any information that might still be there.

Thebiguglyalien (talk) 22:45, 16 April 2024 (UTC)  Done will continue to look for tidbits. 5850 characters now and 4255 before we started the review.

Lightburst, did you want to look any further, or are you satisfied that you've found all of the important details? Thebiguglyalien (talk) 03:47, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

@Thebiguglyalien:I think that is all. I have included all that I can find. Lightburst (talk) 20:21, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

Well-written

• The lead needs to properly summarize the article. Right now it's just a few short sentences. Also, the first sentence doesn't need to be its own paragraph. Done expanded slightly, I think it summarizes the major points but if anything is missing please let me know.
• Palmisano was born – This is the first time he's mentioned in the body, so it should have his full name.  Done I did a bit of expansion and will do more.
• Authorities suspected him of being part – I don't know if it's required, but it's good practice to use his surname instead of a pronoun when starting a new paragraph.  Done
• while others believed him – This is vague. Do we have any information about who? style="background: #FF8; color:black; vertical-align: middle; text-align: center; " class="table-maybe"|Maybe The source implies that it may be a reason or his death, although it admits this was never proven.
• A safe in the tavern was "peeled" open – Why is "peeled" in quotes? If it's a technical term, it should stand on its own. If not, it should be replaced with a technical term.  Done yes the source has it is quotes and then goes on to describe it. So I described the process in a notes section and left the quotation marks.
• Individual sentences shouldn't have their own sections if it can be avoided. This looks like it would fit nicely at the end of the "Early life" section.  Done combined into a new personal life section

Verifiable with no original research

• All sources are reliable.

Unsourced:

• His full name and nickname -  Done his nickname is cited in citation one "personal life" section. I added it. Will remove middle name for now.
• His date of birth -  Done find a grave is not considered reliable. I uploaded his gravestone images to commons. I drove to the cemetery and photographed his grave marker. Sadly it only reads 1928. So I will changed the birthdate to just 1928. The papers all put his age at 49 at the time of death.
• His description as a "reputed mobster"described as a "substantial figure in organized crime" And many more like that. Not sure how to handle this.  Done added an explicit mention.

Spot checks:

• [3] Capital Times – The source says Juneau Garden Village Apartment, not Juneau Village Garden Apartments. And I assume that another citation to this source is supposed to go after The Capital Times newspaper published an article with the headline "Blast Kills Convicted Milwaukee Gambler".?  Done I had the name of the apartments as what they call them. But I changed it to match the source. Also I moved the citation to support the capital headline.
• [8] Green Bay Press-Gazette – Good. Note that this is identical to the Capital Times source.  Done
• [10] Bie – It doesn't look like this source says he "was thought to be behind the bombing". It just quotes him saying something that could be read as him implying he's behind it.  Done hopefully clearer statement was added.
• [11] Kenosha News – Not sure if this is relevant. It would be relevant if other sources took note of the headline and wrote about it, but simply citing the article to show that the headline exists doesn't mean much.  Done I used a part of the article to expand.

Broad in its coverage

The sources I checked have a lot of detail that isn't in the article. While a GA doesn't have to be comprehensive, an article this short isn't justified as a GA if there's still significant room for expansion.

Expanded slightly. I feel like all of the needed information is in the article. I am willing to add anything which you think I may have missed.

Neutral

The article uses a neutral tone and no ideas are given undue weight.

Stable

No disputes.

Illustrated

One image with acceptable non-free use rationale, the other two are adequately licensed.

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.