Talk:Matt Bevin/GA1

GA Review

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.

---

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Coemgenus (talk · contribs) 14:22, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

• I'll review this one over the next few days. --Coemgenus (talk) 14:22, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

Checklist

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

Comments

Initial comments

• Images are all properly licensed
• Article is stable
• NPOV is good. At the end, I couldn't tell what your opinion of Bevin was, which is what we should be going for here.

• More to follow today. --Coemgenus (talk) 12:59, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

Lede

• Not sure you need "since December 8, 2015" in the first sentence.
  • Agree. Pretty sure I didn't add that. Deleted. Acdixon ^{(talk · contribs)} 11:46, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

Marriage and family

• "and opened to the public following an "overwhelming response from the public"" is a little repetitive. "the public...the public"
  • Fixed. Acdixon ^{(talk · contribs)} 11:46, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

Business career

• "After transitioning to the Army Reserve..." Maybe "After leaving active duty..."? Not necessary, I just think it sounds better.
  • My knowledge of the military is very limited, so I wasn't sure if these were synonymous. Agree that your suggestion is better. Changed. Acdixon ^{(talk · contribs)} 11:46, 14 May 2016 (UTC)
• "Bevin is also a partner at Waycross Partners..." Is this still true?
  • I'm not sure. I didn't find anything saying he'd left, although leaving a company isn't typically newsworthy. Acdixon ^{(talk · contribs)} 11:46, 14 May 2016 (UTC)
    • That's true. Let's leave it for now. --Coemgenus (talk) 13:12, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

Bevin's Tea Party support

• "During the campaign, Bevin staunchly criticized..." could probably lose "staunchly"
  • Agreed and done. Acdixon ^{(talk · contribs)} 11:46, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

Result and aftermath

• The first two sentences are kind of irrelevant, now that we know what happened.
  • I thought it was important to note how common the belief was that Bevin was so far behind he would, and should, drop out. If, after reading my rationale, you don't agree, I'd be OK with dropping it. The article is pretty long as it is. Acdixon ^{(talk · contribs)} 11:46, 14 May 2016 (UTC)
    • I see your point. I was looking mostly for ways to trim some of the campaign detail, but I could go either way on this one. --Coemgenus (talk) 13:12, 14 May 2016 (UTC)
      • I know it's being wishy washy to ask for suggestions about trimming the article, and then turn this one down, but that's what I'm going to do for the moment. I'll note this as a good place to start trimming, though. Acdixon ^{(talk · contribs)} 12:02, 15 May 2016 (UTC)
• I'm kind of shocked that the REINS Act has no article, but I can't find one either. Hopefully your redlink will inspire someone to create one.
  • Although I had not heard of it prior to reading this article, I was also surprised once I found out what it was. I've been on a bit of an article creation kick lately. Maybe I'll just take that matter into my own hands. Maybe. Acdixon ^{(talk · contribs)} 11:46, 14 May 2016 (UTC)
• I'll finish the rest of this tonight. --Coemgenus (talk) 20:41, 13 May 2016 (UTC)
  • Thanks for tackling this one. I know it's a beast. If you have suggestions for shortening it, please share. There's already been some talk page chatter that it's too long, especially after we have to add information about 4 (or 8) years in office. I'm too close to the prose to prune it properly, I think. I'll try to stay on top of this review, at least. Been a busy few days, but I should have time tomorrow to attend to whatever else you find. Acdixon ^{(talk · contribs)} 11:46, 14 May 2016 (UTC)
    • I think it's OK for now, but yes, after he's well into his term, it might be good to go back and condense some of the campaign stuff. --Coemgenus (talk) 13:12, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

2015 gubernatorial primary

• In the first paragraph, you could reduce the first two sentence to "Bevin remained politically active after his defeat by McConnell, and an email to his followers calling on Kentucky Governor Steve Beshear, a Democrat, to denounce new carbon regulations issued by the EPA fueled speculation that Bevin would seek the Republican gubernatorial nomination in 2015 or Rand Paul's Senate seat in 2016 if Paul's expected presidential bid kept him from running for re-election." It's still a long sentence, so if you want to break it in two, that makes sense, too.
  • That sentence would too long to be comfortably understood, I think. Acdixon ^{(talk · contribs)} 12:02, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

Result and aftermath

• A little chart of the vote totals wouldn't be out of place here.
  • Good idea. Done. Acdixon ^{(talk · contribs)} 12:02, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

Governor of Kentucky

• Eventually, if not right now, it might make sense to retitle the "Political career" section as "Political campaigns" or something, and raise "Governor of Kentucky" to a level-2 heading. Not sure if that's justified yet.
  • I think it is. Done. Acdixon ^{(talk · contribs)} 12:02, 15 May 2016 (UTC)
• At some point, you stopped capitalizing Kynect. Not sure which is right, but it should be consistent.
  • Yeah, I was trying to work with some existing content and didn't pay attention to that. Fixed. Acdixon ^{(talk · contribs)} 12:02, 15 May 2016 (UTC)
• That's all I have. It's a nice article, that will make a good addition to the collection. --Coemgenus (talk) 13:21, 14 May 2016 (UTC)
  • Thanks for the review. Feels better to not be "under the gun" to get it to GA and preserve the good topic. Acdixon ^{(talk · contribs)} 12:02, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

Promoted

• OK, I think we've covered everything. I'm glad to promote. Nice working with you again. --Coemgenus (talk) 12:58, 15 May 2016 (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.