Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Jean Schmidt/archive1

Jean Schmidt

Self-nom. A second try at this (the previous FAC is here). Profile of the newest Member of Congress. I'd like to have it featured by September 6, the day she takes her oath. Photos, full bibilography. Was on peer review here. PedanticallySpeaking 17:01, August 23, 2005 (UTC)

Support; well-written, well-balanced and readable; to my eye it seems like a model of NPOV on a potentially divisive political figure. Impressive references list. Antandrus (talk) 17:16, 23 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks. PedanticallySpeaking 16:09, August 25, 2005 (UTC)

Support; ditto --WizardOfTheCDrive 17:32, 23 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support; ditto --Ian Pitchford 18:03, 23 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support--looked great on peer review, looks great now. Meelar (talk) 18:25, August 23, 2005 (UTC)
Support--Very Nice PRueda29 (talk)
Support. Niteowlneils 21:49, 23 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support For the most part it is a textbook example of how political articles should be written. --JamesB3 22:53, 23 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thank for your praise. PedanticallySpeaking 16:09, August 25, 2005 (UTC)

Object This is a very good, well referenced article that should be using inline notes in addition to the references. This is especially important since almost all of the direct reference links are to news reports. Within a few months, many of these news links will go dead. With inline notes, the information about which news sources were used as references for each part of the article will not be lost. If this is corrected, I will change my vote to support.--Alabamaboy 00:20, 24 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I would note that most of the news links are to the Cincinnati Enquirer and Cincinnati Post which retain valid links for years. Some links are five years old or more and are still valid. I am aware of even older pages still available. PedanticallySpeaking 16:09, August 25, 2005 (UTC)

Conditional support upon changing of citational style. I normally give much less than a fig about citational style, but in a breaking-news setting inline probably is better. I know it's a PiTA for something that's trivial, but there may be a good reason this time. Geogre 01:00, 24 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support obviously great work: well referenced, many photos (although the last few parts are a bit dry in terms of photos, but its ok), superb grammar, lots of factual information, a great read. no question in my support --Lan56 03:41, August 25, 2005 (UTC)

Wow. Thanks so much. PedanticallySpeaking 16:09, August 25, 2005 (UTC)

Yep, support. Another classic piece of high quality writing by PedanticallySpeaking. Politics can be surprisingly interesting. :) — Stevey7788 (talk) 01:16, 26 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral. I yearn to support, but the captions aren't exactly following the typical caption policy. Johnleemk | Talk 16:21, 26 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Solid reporting, though I'd like to see the external links not go dead as well. Jokestress 17:29, 27 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]