Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Ed Stelmach

< Wikipedia:Featured article candidates
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 by User:SandyGeorgia 16:57, 15 July 2008 [1].

Ed Stelmach

edit
Nominator(s): Sarcasticidealist (talk)


This is a self-nom, as User:Brian Labelle and I are the primary contributors to the current version of the article. I've gone through the Good Article process as well as had a couple of people provide peer reviews. I also requested a couple of experienced FA editors (User:Resolute on-wiki and another one off-wiki) for their thoughts. Being new at this FA thing, I can't say that I'm 100% confident that this is good enough, but I am 100% confident that I've done what I could to get advice on getting it there. All of that being said, I welcome your comments, provided that you don't bite the FAC newb. Sarcasticidealist (talk) 08:39, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

  • Is it possible to get an infobox image facing the text?
I don't think so - the only left-facing free images I've been able to find are these: [2],[3],[4],[5], and they're from the same event as an image already used in the article, and probably not suitable for an infobox in any event. Besides that, while I hate to appeal to WP:OTHERSTUFFISFORWARDFACING, but plenty, of other biographical FAs have front-facing infobox images (and some are even right-facing. Sarcasticidealist (talk) 15:46, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Just found the guideline - first point of MOS:IMAGES. Not the biggest deal, but yeah. —Giggy 01:01, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I think you may be misreading that guideline - as far as I can tell, the article is entirely compliant with it. Sarcasticidealist (talk) 01:07, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
From the first point, "Images of faces should be placed so that the face or eyes look toward the text". From my perspective the infobox image is looking to the right (towards my scrollbar). Apologies if I'm misinterpreting. :) —Giggy 06:32, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I missed the "or eyes". I guess his eyes are looking towards the right. But his face is facing slightly to the left. What to do? Well, since this is the best free picture of the guy we have, I'd suggest that what we do is either live with it or fail the FA over it (my vote would be for the first one, but I'm biased). Sarcasticidealist (talk) 04:15, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Shrug. I won't oppose an FAC over such a minor issue. —Giggy 07:08, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Activist Mike Hudema holding a depiction of Stelmach as he protests Bill 46." - I take it Hudema is protesting? Reads like Stelmach is the protester. (Image caption)
Fixed. Sarcasticidealist (talk) 15:13, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Image without caption in Democratic reform section.
Fixed (there was a caption there, it just wasn't displaying due to a markup error on my part). Sarcasticidealist (talk) 15:13, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "and had directed it to the Wikipedia article on Harry Strom" - for context, say why redirecting to Strom's article is meaningful (if there is any significance to it).
I'd covered this earlier, but I've re-arranged the section to place it alongside the mention of the redirect. I agree that that's better. Sarcasticidealist (talk) 15:46, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "After this manoeuvre was met with mixed media and public reaction, Stelmach backed off threats of legal action and turned to negotiation in an effort to acquire the domain name." - ref?
Removed. Sarcasticidealist (talk) 15:46, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "As of February 2008, no resolution had been reached." - what about as of today?
Removed. Unfortunately, the evidence of no agreement having been reached is in the lack of reporting on the subject, and in Cournoyer's last blog post on the subject [6], which probably doesn't qualify as a WP:RS, and an e-mail from Cournoyer telling me that no resolution has been reached, which certainly doesn't. Sarcasticidealist (talk) 15:46, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(Just took a random section to look at closely. More at another time.) —Giggy 12:41, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

  • "Canadian Broadcasting Corporation" as a publisher does not need to be italicized as it is not a publication.
Fixed. Sarcasticidealist (talk) 19:34, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Ed Stelmach (pronounced /ˈstɛlmæk/) " – I think it's more common practice to have the pronunciation in the lead
Moved. Sarcasticidealist (talk) 19:34, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Gary King (talk) 19:27, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

It's a project of the Heritage Community Foundation, which develops its content in conjunction with government, museums, archives, and media outlets. In the case of the specific facts I use it to reference, it's just taken raw data straight from Elections Alberta and posted it on the web. Sarcasticidealist (talk) 02:50, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
thanks, I figured that might be, but having it out in black and white for other reviewers never hurts. Doesn't hurt to make sure my assumption wasn't wrong either! Ealdgyth - Talk 02:59, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • The Parliamentary Debates refs, are the dates the dates of the debates or the last access dates? I'm assuming they are the dates of the debates, in which case they probably need last access dates for the web links.
They are indeed debate dates. Unfortunately, Template:Cite hansard doesn't currently have an |accessdate field, and I'm not confident enough in my markup skills to add one. If somebody else wants to, I'd be happy to add it to this article. Sarcasticidealist (talk) 02:50, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yikes, I'm not adding anything to a template, at least one I don't use. Any way you could add the access date manually like this: <ref>{{cite hansard}} [[Access date]]</ref>?
Good thinking - done. Sarcasticidealist (talk) 03:29, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Otherwise sources look good, links all checked out with the link checker tool. Ealdgyth - Talk 02:23, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Strong support Fantastic article in every respect. Balanced, well written, nicely illustrated and comprehensive. If only we could get this much detail on people who aren't currently alive! Maury (talk) 13:33, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support Comprehensive, well written, good images. Resolute 04:32, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Great job on your first FA effort. Small things to possibly fix:
    • Per WP:MOSBIO, you shouldn't include the birthplace in the first part of the lead.
    • I'm not familiar with the phrase "in the riding" - is there a wikilink that could be used here?
    • There are a lot of short sections in the Premier section; I wonder if some of these could be merged?

Karanacs (talk) 02:00, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've addressed your first two points. I'll need to give some thought to the third one, since it will take either some re-writing or some expansion to deal with it. Sarcasticidealist (talk) 02:04, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I've linked to the OTRS permission on the Hudema one. I'll look into the Syncrude one. Sarcasticidealist (talk) 22:57, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I've clarified the authorship for Image:Syncrude mildred lake plant.jpg and made the necessary adjustments to the image page on Commons. Sarcasticidealist (talk) 23:17, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Looks good, I believe. --NE2 08:51, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Ed_Stelmach&oldid=1083282060"