Talk:Paul E. Patton/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Dana boomer (talk) 23:20, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

Hi! I'll be reviewing this article for GA status, and should have the full review up shortly. Dana boomer (talk) 23:20, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

   • What would you think about rearranging the first paragraph of the lead slightly. The way it currently reads, the first sentence makes me think "oh, that's what he's notable for? Well, that's not really very distinguishing..." but then the second and third sentences are really what he's notable for. It's not really a huge deal, but more of just a thought... So, my proposal would be something like this:

   "Paul Edward Patton (born May 26, 1937) was the the 59th governor of Kentucky from 1995 to 2003. Because of a 1992 amendment to the Kentucky Constitution, he was the first governor eligible to succeed himself in office since James Garrard in 1800. As of 2010, he is the president of Pikeville College in Pikeville, Kentucky and serves as chairman of the Kentucky Council on Postsecondary Education."

   My original thinking was that I should open with what he's doing now, and when he's not president of PC and/or chairman of CPE any more, move it further into the article, but since this was pointed out on both the failed FAC and now here, I've changed it.

   • Lead, "gained name recognition". Why not just "gained recognition"?

   Done.

   • Early life, "Members of the UMWA local at Shelby Gap maintained that Patton was arrested". Why past tense? Do they no longer maintain this?

   I'm not sure. That incident is more than 30 years past now. Probably some people are still holding onto it, but whether the union as a whole is still vocal about it, I don't know.

   • Early life, " In 1973, Conway had divorced her first husband, Bill Harvey Johnson.[2] Johnson and Conway had two children – Jan Harvey Johnson, Jr. and Bambi (Johnson) Todd.[5] In 1975, Johnson was murdered in what police described as an organized-crime-type hit.[2]" Is any of this really relevant, especialy the last sentence? I think all of this could be summed up by saying something like "Patton was Conway's second husband - she had divorced her first husband, with whom she had two children, in 1973." if the information is really needed at all.

   Yeah, this was a place where the details seemed interesting, but they may not be particularly relevant. I've trimmed them.

   • Political career, "First District congressman Carroll Hubbard". Should "congressman" be capitalized? (I'm really not sure, it just looks odd to me for some reason...)

   On second glance, I think it should be. The full title is "First District Congressman".

   • Pike County Judge/Executive, "(By comparison, Martha Layne Collins spent $140,000 to win the office in 1979 and Steve Beshear spent $250,000 to win it in 1983.)" The parentheses are probably unnecessary.

   Eliminated.

   • Lieutenant governor, "(Other candidates included Steve Collins, son of former governor Martha Layne Collins, and former Speaker of the Kentucky House of Representatives Bobby H. Richardson.)" The parentheses are probably unnecessary.

   Eliminated.

   • First term as governor, "that were recommended by his son, Chris." Why was he going to his son for advice?

   The source isn't really specific. I think it might just be a case of a computer nerd son going "Hey, Dad. Since you're governor and all, I think this would really help." We computer nerds can be rather vocal with our opinions at times! :)

   • Criminal justice reform, "because its system of housing and treating juvenile offenders". Should this be "because of its"?

   Yep. Changed.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

   • I added one fact tag where statistics need a reference.

   Cited. Not sure how I overlooked this.

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

Overall another very nice article. There are a few prose tweaks needed and one place that I would like to see a reference, but none of this should be very difficult. Please let me know if you have any questions. Dana boomer (talk) 00:09, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for another great review, Dana. I know this was a long one, so I appreciate your taking the time to review it. Let me know if I need to do anything further before the article gets passed. Only a few more KY governors to go! Acdixon ^{(talk • contribs • count)} 12:07, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Sorry for the slow response. Everything looks good now, so I am passing the article to GA status. Nice work on another article - it was a pleasure to read, despite the length! Good luck on your next FAC run, Dana boomer (talk) 23:26, 17 April 2010 (UTC)