Talk:William S. Taylor (Kentucky politician)

Comment

Steve, I don't know for sure that the armed men went to the state capitol. I mentioned that they went to "Frankfort, the state capital" because I thought that some readers might not know that Frankfort is the capital. Let me know what you think. Lamont A Cranston 16:04, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

WikiProject class rating

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as stub, and the rating on other projects was brought up to Stub class. BetacommandBot 16:58, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:William S. Taylor (Kentucky politician)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Hi, I am reviewing this article for GA. It is a fascinting story and the article is well written. I have one question:

• http://www.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~kygenweb/kybiog/butler/taylor.ws.txt - is this a reliable source?

RootsWeb seems to be a fairly well-known project where folks transcribe information from historical records including, as in this case, excerpts from out-of-copyright works. The original source is Kentucky: A History of the State. I can't verify that the transcription is 100% accurate because, since the original was published in 1885, I don't have access to a copy. There are four facts attributed to this source. I believe all are either relatively trivial or could probably be cited to other sources. They include the subjects that Taylor taught in his early career, the year of his first run for county clerk (and the fact that he lost), the fact that he was an assistant presidential elector for the Greenbacks, and the fact that he won the election for county clerk in 1880.

If any of these seem non-trivial enough to require a more solid source, I'll either try to find one or remove the information from the article. Unfortunately, very little seems to have been written about the man.

• Also, if there is a copyright problem with File:William S Taylor.jpg, that must be clarified.

I believe the issue was resolved. I was trying to claim fair use, but another editor insists that a public domain claim is in order.

Regards, —Mattisse (Talk) 20:18, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

See responses inline. Thanks for your review. Acdixon ^{(talk • contribs • count)} 20:41, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

• OK —Mattisse (Talk) 20:51, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): Clearly written b (MoS): Follows relevant MoS

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): Well referenced b (citations to reliable sources): Sources are reliable c (OR): No OR

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): Broad in coverage b (focused): Remains on topic

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias: Neutral

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars etc.: Stable

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

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

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail: Pass

Quite an interesting article. Congratulations! —Mattisse (Talk) 20:51, 27 July 2009 (UTC)