Talk:Patrick Nash

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 Patrick Nash was a good article nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There are suggestions below for improving the article. Once these are addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Reviewed version: November 16, 2007
This article is a former Chicago Collaboration of the Week. Every week, a Chicago-related article that is in need of substantial improvement is selected to be the Chicago COTW. Visit CHICOTW to nominate and vote for future COTWs. This week's Chicago COTW is List of Chicago Landmarks update. Please help us improve it to a higher standard of quality. See the To Do List to suggest a change or to see a list of open tasks. See past CHICOTWs. Note our good articles.
A fact from Patrick Nash appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know? column on 4 September 2007.
Wikipedia


[edit] Auto peer review

The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.

You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 20:42, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] GA Fail

The editor(s) involved in this article have clearly put in some serious work to make this article better, but it needs more work before it meets Good Article standards. It gives a decent overview of Nash's life, but it has some problems:

  • Organization. The article feels scattered, as though it's been put together piecemeal and without a strong organizational vision. The items in "Personal life" should be integrated into the article somehow.
  • Depth. "Early life" barely scratches the surface. Isn't there any more information available than the house he lived in? More depth could be added about the sewer-building company, and/or his personal life at the time.
  • Prose quality. The writing is awkward in many spots and – once more depth has been added – need a review from a copyeditor. (I recommend the fine folks at the WP:LoCE.) Some examples of difficult sentences:
  • However, it is his final residential address for the King-Nash House at 3234 West Washington Boulevard where he lived from 1925 until 1943 that became a Chicago Landmark. Very wordy and dense.
  • Nash did continue to run for Democratic party offices and served as a ward committeeman for the 14th Ward and later for the 28th Ward. Too many "and" clauses.
  • Nash and Kelly also began to integrate Blacks into Chicagos' political process. An obvious typo; there are many like it.

This article has a lot of potential, and I wish you luck with it. An overview summary is included below.

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:
    B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail: – Scartol · Talk 18:36, 16 November 2007 (UTC)