Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Don Dunstan

Don Dunstan

This is an well-referenced and detailed article on a famous Australian politician. It has already undergone a peer review, and improved further as a result. This is to hopefully be my fourth featured article - I welcome your comments and votes! michael ^talk 01:46, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Support. This article is about as good as they come. Rebecca 01:54, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support--cj | talk 05:33, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support, looks like a great article. Only slight problem is red links, especially in the first paragraph of "The Dunstan Decade". Not enough to vote oppose, but definitely unsightly. Stilgar135 05:52, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

All those links, in time, will be blue. However, right now there's no point simply writing twenty one-sentence stubs. michael ^talk 05:54, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Support great work. JPD (talk) 13:26, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Conditional Support - I'm one of those sticklers for WP:LEAD, in that this article should have at least a three paragraph lead section. Other than that, looks good to me! Fieari 18:28, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

At less than 30 000 characters, according to WP:LEAD, two paragraphs are sufficent. michael ^talk 01:32, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Not a criteria but is it possible fill out an infobox for Dunstan? I feel infoboxes add a higher level of quality and visual satisfaction to an article. - Tutmosis 14:35, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I did consider adding one. However, the portrait style of the lead image negates any positive impact from an infobox. michael ^talk 16:02, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment, some of the image captions still need work.--Peta 01:34, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've made some changes. If you can be more specific, I'd be glad to know how I could improve them further. michael ^talk 06:50, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Conditional support. I should disclose, as required by the new rules, that I copy-edited part of the article a while back, and had another go at it an hour ago. I think it's good, but a few sentences need ironing out. See my inline queries. BTW, flesh-pink hot pants and cooking books, I love it! PS The WP:LEAD guidelines that Fieri cites above contain proposed guidelines, not strict rules, about the number of paragraphs in a lead. I'll certainly be opposing any move to strict rules in this respect. Tony 08:45, 21 August 2006 (UTC) PPS Please consider consistent use of "ALP"/"Labor Party" after first spelling it out. Same for "SA"/"South Australia". "Commonwealth" is a difficult word for non-Australians. Consider using just "federal", which is universally understood. Tony 08:48, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Starting image still needs a caption, but other than that this is well-written and well sourced. Michael Billington (talk • contribs) 13:20, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]