Jump to content

Talk:Vere Bird Jr./GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing

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

Reviewer: Electronscope44 (talk) 13:44, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This article has several immediate problems.

A detailed review is premature.

  • See Wikipedia:Verifiability "Verifiability in this context means anyone should be able to check that material in a Wikipedia article has been published by a reliable source." There are no hyperlinks or relatively few hyperlinks in the sources though the article could easily link many online news articles.
    There's no need for hyperlinks.
  • It needs to be cleaned up. Its sentence structure is very difficult to read. It needs to be divided into appropriate sections that include personal life and early life and career.

Immediate problems

[edit]
Your lead does not even mention he was Chairman of the ALP.
Wikilink Aniguan
Now done. Ironholds (talk) 12:52, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sentence 1 of lead: "Vere Bird, Jr. is an Antiguan lawyer and politician from the Antigua Labour Party (ALP)."

Done. Ironholds (talk) 12:52, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
What is his birthday? I am sure there is some source giving information about his birthday.
You can be sure as you like; I've searched the entire LexisNexis database and not found it. Ironholds (talk) 12:52, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Shouldn't the first sentence list Vere Bird Jr.'s most prominent attribute. Is he most prominent as a Minister or a Parliamentarian? Or is he most prominent as a son of a prominent politician? I doubt he is most prominent as a lawyer-politician. Or is he most prominent because of the Columbian drug dealer scandal.
Fixed, hopefully. Ironholds (talk) 12:52, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This is a living person biography. Take a look at the Barack Obama page. The first paragraph should be concise, to the point, describe his current status (if he is retired - say so).
There's no differing standard for content in that regard for living politicians. If you can show me some policy which says different, please feel free to. Ironholds (talk) 12:52, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sentence 2 of lead: "The son of Vere Bird, the late Prime Minister of Antigua and Barbuda, Bird, Jr. first entered politics in 1981, and was elected to Parliament three years later."

Several problems. The sentence is a run-on sentence. Get rid of the commas and give some periods. Its a really confusing sentence.
Not only that it is somehow also become a fragment also (which is hard feat when you have a run-on). 'The son of Vere Bird' and 'Bird, Jr.' are both two subjects.
This article interchanges from using Bird, Jr. to Bird after the first two sentences. Fix this. The first sentence should have Bird, Jr. in bold included. But the second sentence does not need Bird, Jr. to be repeated. Bird alone is enough.
Fixed. Ironholds (talk) 12:52, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
'first entered' - reduntant
Fixed. Ironholds (talk) 12:52, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Aren't 'Antgua and Barbuda' and 'Antigua' different things. One is an island. the other is a country composed of two islands. But at the same time avoid weird repetition of Antigua.
No, "Antigua" is the commonly accepted short form of the national name, particularly in a legislative context, since Barbuda elects an entire one representative. Ironholds (talk) 12:52, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

And these are all the problems in the first two sentences. The entire article needs a significant revamping. The prose is a headache and one of the worst in Wikipedia. I could go on like this for sentence after sentence until the end. Electronscope44 (talk) 12:15, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your prose also includes lots of repetition. For example, in the article's last sentence of lead- "This was followed by two more seizures in 2010."
Can you explain how that is repetition? Ironholds (talk) 12:52, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It has so much missing content?

Absolutely no information on his personal life. Is he married? What are his religious views?
No idea and no idea. Provide evidence that sourcing covering such stuff exists or stop complaining about it. Ironholds (talk) 12:52, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
For example, between the sections 'Reappointment' and 'Time in Opposition', this article jumps from 2000 to 2004. No information of what happened in between.
Because there's no coverage of his work between those points. Surprisingly enough, the activities of a minor politician from a minor country = not something most news organisations pay that much attention to unless he screws something up. Ironholds (talk) 12:52, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bad referencing

" Most of an entire paragraph of 3 huge run-on sentences is not even referenced!!

"Bird's career in the Cabinet was finally ended by scandal in 1990 after a shipment of Israeli weapons to Antigua were received and then diverted to Columbian drug dealers. The scandal broke after the Columbian government publicly complained about the use of Antigua as a trans-shipment point; a diplomatic note from the Israeli government revealed that the weapons had been shipped at the express instruction of Bird, who had given assurances that they would not be passed on to any third parties. The Prime Minister repeatedly refused to open an investigation, despite demands by community leaders and members of his own government, saying that "conclusive evidence" was needed."

That's four different sentences, and the reference at the end references the entire paragraph. Ironholds (talk) 12:52, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Many of your sources are newspaper articles that can easily be found on the internet. (Associated Press, BBC, UPI, Guardian) Hyperlink them.
If they can be found on the internet, I can't find them. AP tends not to freely release documents from 1984. Ironholds (talk) 12:52, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Images

No images whatsoever. Zero illustration. Use the fair-use rationale and find a picture.
There's absolutely no fair use rationale. Do you understand the concept of fair use? Ironholds (talk) 12:52, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

How exactly is this article a good article nominee?

Immediate Problems Part 2

[edit]
Maybe your computer isn't working properly. How about you type in this URL- http://www.nytimes.com/1999/06/30/world/vere-bird-89-who-led-antigua-to-freedom.html .
Now found. It provides his mother's name, and the fact that he has other siblings - that's all. Ironholds (talk) 13:36, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Take a look at this. [2] Sorry, but I usually don't have time to spoon-feed people. Maybe next time I will put some more effort when I am dealing with you. I apologize. Electronscope44 (talk) 13:38, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Providing vaguely useful advice and a direction in which to go is not "spoon-feeding"; if you think it is, you should immediately begin boycotting GAN. I have looked at that edit - I have also reverted it, because you added a needless ambiguity. Ironholds (talk) 13:40, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • the article often uses 'the son of Vere Bird'. He is definitely not the only son of Vere Bird. Electronscope44 (talk) 13:19, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • how about you use this source also for ease of access: [3] and include all the missing information from this article that you find within this source. Electronscope44 (talk) 13:21, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    That's in a horribly awkward format and provides absolutely no more information than current references. WP:V does not require the use of online sources, nor does it require the prioritising of online sources over offline ones. The Lakeland Ledger is a Floridian local paper; you really think it's going to be as reliable a source as an international news organisation?

Ironholds (talk) 13:26, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Really, no more new information. How about he has a brother? Electronscope44 (talk) 13:33, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
His brother is repeatedly mentioned in the existing article. Ironholds (talk) 13:36, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
So fix this again: "Bird's career in the Cabinet was finally ended by scandal in 1990 after a shipment of Israeli weapons to Antigua were received and then diverted to Columbian drug dealers. The scandal broke after the Columbian government publicly complained about the use of Antigua as a trans-shipment point; a diplomatic note from the Israeli government revealed that the weapons had been shipped at the express instruction of Bird, who had given assurances that they would not be passed on to any third parties. The Prime Minister repeatedly refused to open an investigation, despite demands by community leaders and members of his own government, saying that "conclusive evidence" was needed." Electronscope44 (talk) 13:29, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I am perfectly aware of the citation template. Heard about grandmothers and sucking eggs? I simply see no need to add multiple citations when it is fairly clear what the paragraph is relying on - it needlessly clogs the text. Ironholds (talk) 13:37, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Pardon me but I disagree. I have no idea what 'grandmothers and sucking eggs' is. maybe it is your consistent difficulty in describing what you think into what you write. It sadly shows. Hopefully, we can improve on that next time. Electronscope44 (talk) 13:40, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Nobody who writes "consistent difficulty in describing what you think into what you write" gets to score points over obtuseness. See Teaching grandmother to suck eggs. Ironholds (talk) 13:42, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe you should refocus some of that energy into finding sources for the article instead of finding orphan articles. I hope you become a better Wikipedian out of this experience.Electronscope44 (talk) 13:46, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Columbian drug dealers... really. How about the article specifies the cartel? How about Wikilinking properly also. Here, since you are having so much difficulty in finding sources.. let me help you, [5] Another demonstration of how incomplete this article is. Electronscope44 (talk) 13:45, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The article also mentions about some of his personal life - his brother. "Then, in 1995, another Bird brother, Ivor, was fined $75,000 after being caught with a 25-pound shipment of cocaine as he boarded a plane at the airport, which is named for his father." Electronscope44 (talk) 13:49, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for providing the source. If you find any others, do let me know. In the meantime, I will integrate what you have provided into the article later today (I'm at work at the moment) and would suggest that we wait for a third-party reviewer. Ironholds (talk) 13:47, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Electronscope, I think you may be misunderstanding the purpose of Good Article Reviews. Your goal here is not to tell Ironholds he's incompetent and shouldn't have dared nominate an article; your goal here is to point out what he can fix it so it meets the (quite lax) Good article criteria. Your attempting to fail the article on factors that aren't included in the criteria - hyperlinking references, words being re-used (which you keep saying in a problem, but not pointing out the re-use of), or a source that's not your preferred one being used - is not constructive. Even if such problems were part of the good article criteria, your goal would be to point out where the article falters so that its editors - Ironholds and I, and possibly others - can fix them, not to wave your hands and say "This is terrible! There's no use even reviewing it if you can't see what's wrong with it!"
It is not required in the GA criteria that an article hyperlink sources, nor that an article use every source that you wish it used, nor that it use the citation format you prefer, nor that it contain images. Nor is it a requirement, for that matter, that article editors hew to your rather strange definition of "run-on sentence," which doesn't match the actual definition (protip: commas do not mean a sentence is a run-on).
Please, please re-read the GA criteria and consider changing your review so that it discusses actual GA-related problems that the article's editors are able to fix, rather than making vague suggestions that we find the problems which you see but we don't (or asking us to change things unrelated to GAN). A fluffernutter is a sandwich! (talk) 15:22, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Fluffernutter, you clearly received only a part of the picture. I was quite viciously attacked on my user page [13] for assessing that the article in its then-state was not a good article.
Fluffernutter, I also understand that though you can continue to participate in this review, you can not consider yourself a reviewer of this page because I have learned that you had already done considerable improvements to the Vere Bird Jr page before this article was even nominated. So it has come as little surprise to me, that your comments may be biased. How unfortunate.Electronscope44 (talk) 12:28, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Er, what? I'm commenting as an editor of this article. That's why I called myself an editor of the article just above, you may notice. As an editor of this article, I'm pointing out that your review is not following the GA criteria, which makes it pretty much useless for us, the editors of the article, in trying to make sure the article meets GA standards. It would be great if you would read the criteria and start giving us feedback that will actually help in the goal of making the article meet any GA criteria it doesn't yet meet. A fluffernutter is a sandwich! (talk) 13:29, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
As a side note, please don't accuse editors of bias. Unless you have substantial evidence of an editor editing contrary to our neutrality principles, it violates our rule of assuming good faith. A fluffernutter is a sandwich! (talk) 13:33, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
May I also remind Electronscope to read WP:AGF, and consider that while one option is that Fluffernutter is biased, another is that you might occasionally be wrong about something. Ironholds (talk) 13:34, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Second Opinion

[edit]
  • Antigua is an informal shorthand for the country Antigua and Barbuda, but in an encyclopaedia, the full name should be used, to clarify if the country or the island is being discussed at each junction.
  • For clarity, can we stick with either "Prime Minister" or "Premier" as the title of the post?
  • MOS tends to be against "the late" to refer to people.
  • "This business was concluded on 16 July, when" Of what year?
  • "Bird, described as "a more single-minded, figure, long resentful at being over-shadowed by his sibling"," Described by whom?
  • "to Columbian drug dealers." The drug dealers aren't from South Carolina. The word here is "Colombian". There's several of these typos.
  • There's a mixture of three different date formats. I ran the script to align them day month year, but check. I see one "May, 1984", there shouldn't ever be a comma between a month and a year.
  • You're talking about "Parliament" when you really mean the House of Representatives of Antigua and Barbuda, especially when you mention seventeen seats.
  • There's some good sources above, and I'll be happy to take another look after some more information is added. Courcelles 14:39, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks, Courcelles. I have now corrected all of these issued and included those sources which actually provided additional information. Ironholds (talk) 15:37, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Developing Improvements

[edit]

Electronscope44 (talk) 12:31, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
As you can see this article has had significant improvements.

  • As a Good Article reviewer, I have a responsibility to check the factual accuracy and verifiability of the references.
    • "Lewis, Lotan (18 April 1984). "Bird, Two Sons Elected in Labor Party Sweep". The Associated Press."
      "Antigua and Barbuda". Defense & Foreign Affairs. May 1984.
      "Caribbean News Briefs". United Press International. 16 July 1984.
      "Cabinet of Antigua and Barbuda Reshuffled". The Xinhua General Overseas News Service. 1 January 1987
      "Antigua-Barbuda: Prime Minister Bird Reshuffles Cabinet". BBC Summary of World Broadcasts (BBC). 3 January 1987.

If these sources are hard to find as you said and you can't hyperlink them, then how did the article even get access to these sources? I may very well may be wrong, but most people don't have access to these sources on their bookshelf.

As I have previously said, I have LexisNexis access. Ironholds (talk) 12:39, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • "in the hands of the Medellín Cartel of Colombian drug smugglers" - repetition
    Once again; explain the problem. 12:39, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
Are we serious? A cartel is a drug smuggler. Electronscope44 (talk) 12:42, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
No, Electronscope, a cartel is a homogeneous organisation formed by several competing groups to maximise profit or increase the likelihood of success. This is a very well-known term. Ironholds (talk) 12:44, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Despite this decision," its the beginning of a new paragraph in the lead, so therefore the article should reduce ambiguity. Not only that, but also it would be better for the neutrality of this article if that phrase was removed.
    "its the beginning of a new paragraph in the lead, so therefore the article should reduce ambiguity" - what does this mean? And how can the phrase "despite this decision" violate WP:NPOV"
  • "he seven politicians were found guilty of public order offences, after delays following a seizure suffered by Bird during the trial" These two sentences have a few problems. 'after delays following'- repetition problem. Ambiguity - did the delays occur after or before his arrest. It would be better off as two separate sentences. 'This was followed by two more seizures in 2010.'
    Fixed. Ironholds (talk) 12:39, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • "This was followed by two more seizures in 2010." this detail about his trial really doesn't belong in the lead.
    It's not about the trial. Ironholds (talk) 12:39, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Specify that or remove it from it from the lead.Electronscope44 (talk) 12:44, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
As I have done. Ironholds (talk) 12:46, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • "He was finally fired" - neutrality problem
    Fixed. Ironholds (talk) 12:39, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Bird, the son of Premier Vere Bird, first entered politics in 1981, when he served as an unelected security official during the general election." Run-on sentence. He is not "the son of Vere Bird". He is one of several sons.
    "the son of X" is a perfectly acceptable part of the English language. As Fluffernutter says above, the presence of commas != runon sentence. Please indicate why it is a runon sentence and what your preferred changes would be. Ironholds (talk) 12:39, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The sentence in the quotation has four commas! Are we waiting for a fifth comma to make this sentence a run-on? Electronscope44 (talk) 12:46, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Electronscope, commas do not make a sentence a run-on sentence. Please review the technical definition of "run-on sentence"; there's a professional linguist up above telling you you're wrong. Ironholds (talk) 12:48, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Missing Content

[edit]
  • Please read this source to improve the article: It has ALOT of material on this person, some of which that has not been mentioned. And some already mentioned information that can improve the accessibility of the article's references, which is not a prerequisite for Good Article criteria but is certainly an improvement to the article
Neither of those sources are accessible in the UK. Ironholds (talk) 13:30, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Fine. I will probably add that content to the article myself once you are done adding all the content from the links. Electronscope44 (talk) 13:33, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
You cannot do that; a reviewer should not be involved in editing the article. Further direct editing risks invalidating your position as a reviewer, as I have already warned you (although you followed that warning by making more edits). Ironholds (talk) 13:47, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I will add these sources when I get home. Please sign your posts, and address my above concerns. Ironholds (talk) 13:30, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • The article does not even mention his brother was Prime Minister that he served appointed him to the government. It should mention this in the lead because the lead mentions his father was a Prime Minister.
You are right. But it should also mention this in the lead because the lead mentions his father was a Prime Minister. Electronscope44 (talk) 13:40, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It does. Ironholds (talk) 13:47, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Review terminated

[edit]

As the reviewer has been blocked for an unrelated reason. I am terminating this review an renominating with the original timestamp. Jezhotwells (talk) 23:18, 7 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  1. ^ a b details of the citation
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Vere_Bird_Jr./GA1&oldid=1141749685"