Talk:Harry S. Truman 1948 presidential campaign/GA1
GA Review
[edit]| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Reviewer: Maile66 (talk · contribs) 00:21, 11 October 2021 (UTC)
@Kavyansh.Singh: I'm going to be doing this review for you, and, if needed, make comments here. I just made a handful of punctuation corrections based on MOS:HOWEVER. Anything else, I'll leave comments here for you. — Maile (talk) 00:21, 11 October 2021 (UTC)
- @Maile66 – Thanks a lot! I really spent some time in creating this article, and also want to nominate it for Featured article. Would appreciate any comments ... – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 08:35, 11 October 2021 (UTC)
- Background section
- "nominated him as the vice-presidential nominee" seems redundant. How about something like, "chose him as the vice-presidential nominee", or "nominated him the vice-presidential running mate for Franklin Roosevent's fourth run for the presidency" or something similar.
- Done. – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 09:20, 11 October 2021 (UTC)
- "Truman implemented the Marshall Plan" Could you have something like "the Marshall Plan, allocating foreign aid for Western Europe."
- Done. – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 08:56, 11 October 2021 (UTC)
Those are the only two suggestions I have for that section. — Maile (talk) 00:40, 11 October 2021 (UTC)
- Preparing for a run
- "he considered choosing General Dwight D. Eisenhower as his running mate, but Eisenhower declined." Did Truman discuss it with Eisenhower, or did Eisenhower just make a public statement without being asked?
- Well, I have corrected/expanded a few details from this section. Truman initially didn't wanted to run, and expected Eisenhower to lead the Democratic party as their nominee. He even had though of running as Eisenhower's VP! But Eisenhower declined to be a "politician" in a public statement. I have added few lines from Draft Eisenhower movement, an article I recently expanded. Imagine a president agreeing to be VP! Gerald Ford too somewhat agreed to be Reagan's VP in 1980, but that negotiation failed. – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 10:15, 11 October 2021 (UTC)
- Well, I learned something new today. I did not know Ford agreed to be Reagan's running mate. But I can see that, as Ford was a loyal team player.
- Well, I have corrected/expanded a few details from this section. Truman initially didn't wanted to run, and expected Eisenhower to lead the Democratic party as their nominee. He even had though of running as Eisenhower's VP! But Eisenhower declined to be a "politician" in a public statement. I have added few lines from Draft Eisenhower movement, an article I recently expanded. Imagine a president agreeing to be VP! Gerald Ford too somewhat agreed to be Reagan's VP in 1980, but that negotiation failed. – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 10:15, 11 October 2021 (UTC)
- "faced opposition within the Democratic Party by the Progressive movement led by" Perhaps say, "from the Progressive movement"
- Done. – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 08:56, 11 October 2021 (UTC)
- Early developments
- "Organizes failed to publicize" Maybe you meant either "organizations" or "organizers"
- Yeah, its organizers. – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 08:56, 11 October 2021 (UTC)
- Democratic convention
- No issues in this section
- Campaign
- Very well done, well detailed. No issues to correct.
- Thanks! – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 08:56, 11 October 2021 (UTC)
- Election day
- Everything looks good here.
- Aftermath and legacy
- Good wrap-up here, this is fine.
- I've gone through the basics, and will check the rest of the Wikipedia:GACR tomorrow. — Maile (talk) 01:45, 11 October 2021 (UTC)
- 1) Well written
Pass
- 2) Verifiable with no original research
- Pass
- This is extensively sourced, with no issues on either OR or copy vio dectors.
- 3) Broad in its coverage
- Pass
- 4) Neutral
- Pass
- 5) Stable
- Pass
- 6) Illustrated
- a. Copyright status and/or fair use if non-free ?
- Pass
- b. Captioned and relevant to topic ?
- Pass
- 7) Overall
- Pass
Congratulations. Job well done. — Maile (talk) 16:57, 11 October 2021 (UTC)
- @Maile66 – Thanks a lot! In your opinion, does this has any chances at FAC? I'll try to open a Peer review soon. – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 17:05, 11 October 2021 (UTC)
- @Kavyansh.Singh: I believe this would be an excellent FAC. Go for it! — Maile (talk) 17:08, 11 October 2021 (UTC)
- Also, @Kavyansh.Singh:, if you are planning Peer Review just to pick out any loose ends, Peer Review is pretty backed up. My recommendation, is to go straight to FAC. If there's anything you or I missed, FAC will catch it. — Maile (talk) 17:36, 11 October 2021 (UTC)
- @Maile66 – I can't go straight at FAC, as I already have one article (Daisy) at FAC, and to nominate another, the source review needs to be passed. I have opened the peer review page, and will request few reviewers, who might be interested in commenting. If nothing happens in a week or so, I'll directly go to FAC. How is that? – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 17:44, 11 October 2021 (UTC)
- Also, @Kavyansh.Singh:, if you are planning Peer Review just to pick out any loose ends, Peer Review is pretty backed up. My recommendation, is to go straight to FAC. If there's anything you or I missed, FAC will catch it. — Maile (talk) 17:36, 11 October 2021 (UTC)
- @Kavyansh.Singh: Ah ... I see it now, the Daisy campaign ad. OK. — Maile (talk) 18:37, 11 October 2021 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.