Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/John Martin Scripps
- The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.
The article was promoted 02:07, 1 June 2007.
After going through a very productive peer review here, I believe this article is ready for the star. It is well-referenced, the prose is of engaging quality, and the three non-free images used have valid fair use rationales. Resurgent insurgent 13:47, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Support with some comments Very interesting article, even though the subject matter isn't too pleasant! A few comments:
- "...suicide by gassing..." - the wikilink on gassing takes you to Gas which I'm not sure is really ideal.
- "Life seemed to return to normal ..." - by the sounds of it, normal to Scripps was pretty abnormal by most standards. Consider a re-word of this opening, I think.
- Big wikilink - "from Category B to Category C" - I'd prefer a reword like "...due to a reduction in his security categorisation..." and wikilink the "security categorisation" phrase. But that's a personal preference...
- "...would be a big mistake..." seems a bit POV.
- A small explanation of who Flor Contemplacion was would be helpful to add context (I didn't even know it was a person!).
- In the trial section, Scripps is claimed to have fended off homosexual advances whilst in prison in Israel in 1978 - was he actually imprisoned in Israel at the time? I might have missed it earlier but I don't remember that being mentioned in the article. Or, perhaps he made it up?
- The Family section seems oddly positioned. I would think that it was possible to incorporate all the information in this section in sections before the Post-death coverage section.
I think mostly these are all minor comments and hope they help a bit. Let me know if there's anything else I can do. The Rambling Man 16:18, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Preliminary note before I fix the rest: I can find no reliable sources that mention why he was in Israel in 1978. All the reports on the trial say "Martin said he fended off a homosexual attack while in prison in Israel in 1978," and nothing more. I'm also curious how and why he came to end up in jail there; this explains he was jailed for stealing from a kibbutz worker (and that he ran away from a cadet training camp in France earlier), but I'm not sure where the author got the info from and the page is hosted on a personal web host. Resurgent insurgent 23:42, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- All done except for the Family section. I could merge it into Early life but that would bloat the section. Let me think of a way. Resurgent insurgent 01:29, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I moved the Family section up to between Early life and Murder of tourists, since the Early life section lends context to it and it ends off with a possible motivation for the murders which are mentioned next. I also split the ending quote to the Appeal and hanging section. Resurgent insurgent 02:27, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Support
CommentVery well-written article.There are several paragraphs in the Early Years section that do not contain sources. If you'll fix that and the concerns of the reviewer above I'll support.Karanacs 19:42, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]- Hmm... all of those paragraphs in that section which have no inline cites attached to them were taken from the same source [3]. I didn't know whether it was better to have [3] after every paragraph, or just at the end of the entire block that I reworded. I chose the second option. Resurgent insurgent 23:42, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- It's usually wise to have at least one cite per paragraph. That way, if someone comes around and rearranges the article, you still know where the information came from. Karanacs 00:55, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- OK, done. :) Resurgent insurgent 01:29, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- It's usually wise to have at least one cite per paragraph. That way, if someone comes around and rearranges the article, you still know where the information came from. Karanacs 00:55, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Hmm... all of those paragraphs in that section which have no inline cites attached to them were taken from the same source [3]. I didn't know whether it was better to have [3] after every paragraph, or just at the end of the entire block that I reworded. I chose the second option. Resurgent insurgent 23:42, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Support: I found it a very interesting, well written article. Anynobody 06:00, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Support per above. Chensiyuan 10:21, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Support, well written article. Terence 15:19, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Support, easily readable, not a pleasant topic. — mrmaroon25 (talk • contribs) 19:15, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.