Talk:1951 Philadelphia municipal election/GA1

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.

---

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

Reviewer: West Virginian (talk · contribs) 13:03, 6 September 2015 (UTC)

Coemgenus, I will engage in a thorough and comprehensive review and re-review of this article within the next 48 hours. Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns in the meantime. Thanks! -- West Virginian (talk) 13:03, 6 September 2015 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

---

Coemgenus, first and foremost, I apologize profusely for my delayed review of your article. This ended up being quite a busy week, but now that I have a moment, I've been able to review your article as promised. This article meets all the criteria for Good Article status, but I just had a few comments and concerns below that must first be addressed prior to its passage to Good Article status. Thanks again! -- West Virginian (talk) 17:16, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose, no copyvios, spelling and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

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 and other media, where possible and appropriate.

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

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

Lede and overall

• Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lead section, the lede of this article stands alone as a concise overview and summary of the article. The lede defines the election, establishes context for the election, explains why the election is notable, and summarizes the most important points of the election.
• Per Wikipedia:Alternative text for images, it is suggested that all images in this article have an alt caption describing the images, especially for situations where the image is not available to the reader or where a user is using a screen reader due to visual impairment.
• I don't think it would be over linking to include a wiki-link to either Democratic Party (United States) or Pennsylvania Democratic Party when first mentioning Democrat. The same would be true for Republican and its respective articles.
• I would also suggest wiki-linking city-county consolidation to the article entitled Consolidated city-county.
• The last sentence isn't necessarily sourced or discussed in the article, although the reader can draw this conclusion. I would suggest that in the future, consider adding a section entitled "Legacy" or "Significance" to provide a discussion of the ramifications of this election and how it shaped the future of politics in Philadelphia government.
• The lede is well-written, its contents are cited below within the text, the references are verifiable, and I have no further comments or suggestions for this section.

Mayor

• The image of Joseph S. Clark, Jr. has been released into the public domain and is therefore eligible to use here.
• Rather than "army officer," perhaps be more specific with "U.S. Army officer." This is merely a suggestion.
• Consider rephrasing "he switched to the Democrats in 1928" to "he switched his party affiliation to the Democrats in 1928" or "he switched his affiliation to the Democratic Party in 1928" or something like that.
• While the article is not too inundated with "Clark" references, it wouldn't hurt to switch some of the "Clarks" to personal pronouns.
• The table is beautifully formatted in this section and adequately sourced.
• This section is well-written, its contents are cited below within the text, the references are verifiable, and I have no further comments or suggestions for this section.

District Attorney

• The image of Richardson Dilworth has been released into the public domain and is therefore suitable for inclusion here.
• The table is beautifully formatted in this section and adequately sourced.
• This section is well-written, its contents are cited below within the text, the references are verifiable, and I have no further comments or suggestions for this section.

City Council

• I would suggest wiki-linking the first mention of "at-large" to the article.
• Rather than "In North Philadelphia's 5th district," it may be mored correct to say "In the city's 5th district in North Philadelphia..." as it is not the 5th district of North Philadelphia, but the 5th district of Philadelphia, which happens to be in northern part of the city-county.
• The tables are all beautifully formatted in this section and are adequately sourced.
• The image of the map of Philadelphia city council districts after the 1951 election is licensed CC BY-SA 4.0 and is therefore acceptable for use here.
• This section is well-written, its contents are cited below within the text, the references are verifiable, and I have no further comments or suggestions for this section.

Other offices and referendum

• Clerk of courts could be wiki-linked to "Court clerk"
• Philadelphia County should be wiki-linked to Philadelphia County, Pennsylvania.
• This section is well-written, its contents are cited below within the text, the references are verifiable, and I have no further comments or suggestions for this section.

@West Virginian: thanks for the review! I think I've remedied all the problems. My changes are here. --Coemgenus (talk) 14:12, 12 September 2015 (UTC)

@Coemgenus:, I've re-reviewed the article and find that you have sufficiently addressed all my questions, and so I hereby pass this article to Good Article status! Thank you for all your hard work in researching and drafting this article. -- West Virginian (talk) 15:02, 12 September 2015 (UTC)

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.