Talk:William F. Winter

Potential sources

• [1] -Indy beetle (talk) 19:47, 20 May 2022 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:William F. Winter/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Jon698 (talk · contribs) 20:27, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

• Hello I am going to review this article over the course of the next few days. I have written a GA article for a Mississippi governor in the past so I am experienced in this specific case. Jon698 (talk) 20:27, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

• I will start this review after I finish working on the Mike Sullivan page that I have in my sandbox. Jon698 (talk) 12:08, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

• I'm going to start working on the review today. Jon698 (talk) 21:27, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
• Hey @Indy beetle: I made a significant edit to the article's lead and I would like you to see if you could improve from that. The lead was pretty much the only major thing I had problems with and once I check the rest of the article sections, which will probably just amount to a few sentence changes or deletions, before finishing the review. The reason why this is kinda taking so long is because I am reading from the physical Bolton book. Jon698 (talk) 17:00, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

• Update @Indy beetle: I got done going through the page so once you just do the lead edits I will post the final review and okay this article to become a GA. Congratulations. Jon698 (talk) 20:00, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

@Jon698: What lead edits are you suggesting? -Indy beetle (talk) 20:49, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

• @Indy beetle: Just any general improvements you can think of. If you can't find any that is fine and the review will end. Jon698 (talk) 20:54, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

My edits, a blend of the old and new. Wanted to keep sentence structure a little more varied and I don't think which army units he served in or the fact that he supported Stennis' election in 1947 were really major parts of his life relative to everything else. -Indy beetle (talk) 22:04, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

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):

   Completely well-written.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

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

   I have read through the major source used for this article and it verifies all of the information in this article. The other sources that have online access also verify the information.

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   It covers the entirety of his life in detail. It includes all of his political office, army service, legal career, political campaigns, and later life.

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

   It it neutral and includes information about his segregationist and anti-segregationist viewpoints.

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

   No edit wars and no other major editors.

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

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

   Good usage of images from throughout his life.

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   Great article from the start that only needed a few tweaks. I am going to be adding a few election maps to this page and expanded the electoral history section once I get the information from the Mississippi Secretary of State, but that isn't stopping this article from being accepted. Another good job by you. Jon698 (talk) 01:09, 6 June 2022 (UTC)