Talk:James "Honest Dick" Tate

Good article nomination on hold

This article's Good Article promotion has been put on hold. During review, some issues were discovered that can be resolved without a major re-write. This is how the article, as of August 13, 2007, compares against the six good article criteria:

1. Well written?: Yes

2. Factually accurate?: There could be a citation or more for the information in paragraph 1 of Disappearance and aftermath section.

3. Broad in coverage?: Is there more information on his politcal career, such as things he did in his political positions?

4. Neutral point of view?: Paragraph 1 of Disappearance is slightly POV, what makes him a man of great repute, what is his "impeccable record of trustworthiness"?

5. Article stability? Yes

6. Images?: Passable

Please address these matters soon and then leave a note here showing how they have been resolved. After 48 hours the article should be reviewed again. If these issues are not addressed within 7 days, the article may be failed without further notice. Thank you for your work so far. — T Rex | talk 12:36, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

I have addressed the citation issue by reassembling a paragraph that I apparently split at some point, detaching the citation from the full paragraph. The second of the two paragraphs was only a sentence long anyway, so this was a needed edit.

I would love to add details about what he did in his political positions, but I haven't been able to locate any such information. All of the resources I have been able to locate that were written before his disappearance seem to heap praise on him without saying much beyond "He's a really great guy; everybody likes him." The ones written after his disappearance focus only on the irregularities in his bookkeeping. I live in Kentucky, and I have no idea what the Assistant Secretary of State or the Assistant Clerk of the Kentucky House of Representatives does. Apparently, it isn't very notable. There don't seem to be any sources that detail his time in these positions.

I have addressed one instance you point out as POV. Tate's impeccable record of trustworthiness was obviously just a perception by his peers, and this point has been clarified. As to the issue of his repute, I feel that the quote from the Biographical Encyclopedia of Kentucky serves to show that he was highly reputable, even if wrongly so.

If I need to do something further for the article to pass GA, please leave details here. Thanks for your review. Acdixon ^{(talk • contribs • count)} 02:17, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

You might want to try a Google Books search, there seems to be some more sources on him. T Rex | talk 02:37, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Successful good article nomination

I am glad to report that this article nominee for good article status has been promoted. This is how the article, as of August 16, 2007, compares against the six good article criteria:

1. Well written?: Yes

2. Factually accurate?: Yes

3. Broad in coverage?: Yes for a good article, I'm not sure if this will ever be featured due to lack of sources

4. Neutral point of view?: Yes

5. Article stability? Yes

6. Images?: Yes

If you feel that this review is in error, feel free to take it to a GA review. Thank you to all of the editors who worked hard to bring it to this status, and congratulations. — T Rex | talk 06:23, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

GA Reassessment

This discussion is transcluded from Talk:James "Honest Dick" Tate/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the reassessment.

I will do the GA Reassessment on this article as part of the GA Sweeps project. H1nkles (talk) 17:50, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

The article is solid, well-written and cogent. It covers the main points and complies with MOS standards. The web links are sound. And formatting of the references is good. I'd like to see more detail on some of the sections, especially the embezzlement but if there isn't anything available then so be it. At any rate it's certainly still a GA. H1nkles (talk) 21:06, 17 June 2009 (UTC)