Talk:Alan Mulally

Latest comment: 6 years ago by InternetArchiveBot in topic External links modified (January 2018)
Former good article nomineeAlan Mulally was a good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
December 17, 2008Good article nomineeNot listed
In the newsA news item involving this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "In the news" column on September 5, 2006.

Biography assessment rating comment edit

The article may be improved by following the WikiProject Biography 11 easy steps to producing at least a B article. -- Jreferee 18:39, 12 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

Picture edit

Can we add a picture to this? An idea is http://cache.jalopnik.com/cars/assets/resources/2006/09/Alan-Mulally-Ford.jpg Redsox7897 19:43, 30 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

GA Review edit

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

This article seems to meet all 6 criteria. Thank you for your consideration of this article. Chergles (talk) 00:46, 5 December 2008 (UTC)Reply

This is my checklist.

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

  1. Is it reasonably well written?
    A. Prose quality:  
    B. MoS compliance:  
  2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
    A. References to sources:  
    B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:  
    C. No original research:  
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. Major aspects:  
    B. Focused:  
  4. Is it neutral?
    Fair representation without bias:  
  5. Is it stable?
    No edit wars, etc:  
  6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
    A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:   , no non-free images
    B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:  
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:   PLEASE SOMEONE ELSE ALSO MAKE THIS DETERMINATION

However, I'll let someone else also review it. I'm new to this so I'm using the above only as a checklist Chergles (talk) 22:47, 6 December 2008 (UTC)Reply

GA review (see here for criteria)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose):   b (MoS):  
    There are several breaches of the MOS. For instance, dates and even years are wikilinked. References are not fully within the cite template: use the "date" and "accessdate" to add those within the templates. Some ref are not even within a cite template. There are also a few buzzwords that should be removed (such as revolutionary). There is also a lot of overcapitalization (see MOS:CAPS); for instance "president" should only be capitalized if used as a prefix (i.e. President Mulally vs. Mulally is president of Ford).
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references):   b (citations to reliable sources):   c (OR):  
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects):   b (focused):  
    For a article on a CEO of one of the worlds largest corporations, it is extremely short. Topics mentioned seem to deviate from important issues, and instead cover trivia. Especially the introduction is very short, and probably be fivefold the current length. To meet GA criteria, a lot more information on duties in Boeing must be covered (he spend some 35 years there), plus more on person life (such as hobbies), where he grew up etc. I also find the article tends towards recemtism.
  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:  
    I'm sorry, but this article is far away from meeting the GA criteria. Except for the reference formatting and date wikilinking, it is good enough prose, but it is far to short for GA for a so important person. It should probably be three to five times the current length. Good luck with further improvements to the article. Arsenikk (talk) 16:55, 17 December 2008 (UTC)Reply


The caption under the first image under "Ford Motor Company" states former President Bush and Mulally... " touting Ford's new hybrid cars" but they're clearing peering under the hood of an '07 F-150 with the Triton 5.4L V8. Can we change this to something thats not about hybrids? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.176.61.26 (talk) 14:39, 5 April 2010 (UTC)Reply

Orphaned references in Alan Mulally edit

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Alan Mulally's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "Alan":

  • From Ford Taurus: "CEO insisted in bringing "Taurus" back". MSNBC. 2007-02-07. Retrieved 2007-07-26.
  • From Ford Taurus (fourth generation): "CEO insisted in bringing "Taurus" back". MSNBC. 2007-02-07. Retrieved 2007-07-26. {{cite web}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT 18:09, 21 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

Category removed edit

I rv Category:American Roman Catholics as unsourced. I could not even find any confirmation (pardon the expression) via Google search, except on some wacky conspiracy theory sites where he is mentioned in passing. I mean he may be Catholic, but where's the proof? Rms125a@hotmail.com (talk) 21:46, 13 September 2010 (UTC)Reply

This is a fair point and it should be very easy to remove one category. However, please do not revert to a very old revision that otherwise disrupts the article to make a point. KimChee (talk) 04:37, 27 September 2010 (UTC)Reply
I looked up the subject and found information from reliable sources that should hopefully address this matter. KimChee (talk) 02:08, 28 September 2010 (UTC)Reply

External links modified edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Alan Mulally. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:55, 7 October 2016 (UTC)Reply

External links modified (January 2018) edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Alan Mulally. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:13, 25 January 2018 (UTC)Reply