Talk:Julian Carroll/GA1

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: hamiltonstone (talk) 22:25, 31 March 2010 (UTC) The text is generally well written, neutral and appropriately referenced. The references really need two subheads, such as "notes" and "bibliography", rather than having the biblio just run on from the end of the numbered notes. The fact that the only portrait (and only picture) in the rticle is actually of someone else is somewhat confusing. It might be clarified by at least changing the image caption to say something like "Wendell Ford. His election to..."[reply]

This article's biggest problem may be the main source used: Conn's book. I looked at the publisher, which is an imprint or subsidiary of the Baker Publishing Group, which says of itself "Baker Publishing Group publishes high-quality writings that represent historic Christianity and serve the diverse interests and concerns of evangelical readers." It is certainly not a scholarly press, nor in some respects a particularly neutral one, and I would welcome the nominator's view about why this source is reliable.

I was concerned about this, but I did not find the book particularly POV when I read it. I'm used to using sources from the 19th and early 20th centuries where authors often laud the subject with flowery praise, so I feel like I'm pretty good at weeding that kind of thing out. As far as I can tell, this is the only biography of Carroll that has ever been written. Eliminating it as a source would remove much of the information from the article, particularly the details of his early life. Are there particular passages cited to this source that you are concerned about?

It was the para about behaviour in the chamber that raised my concerns. I guess it made me wonder whether the bio was a bit too favourable towards, or uncritical of, Carroll, presumably because he is a christian whom the author / publisher wishes to present as a role model. But if you are familiar with the range of sources and it looks OK to you, then good. I imagine this would raise itself as an issue at FAC if ever you took this piece there. Cheers, hamiltonstone (talk) 11:44, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You may be right about the issue being raised at FAC, but I'm not sure whether I'll take it there or not. Regardless, I'm confident that the major particulars are probably correct on this. Just a few years later, the Operation Boptrot scandal sent some of Kentucky's legislators to prison, so proper etiquette probably wasn't high on the priority list in the General Assembly. Plus, I'm thinking the complimentary quote from a Republican legislator probably has to be from the record of the Assembly's proceedings, although I'm not sure how to access those. Acdixon ^{(talk • contribs • count)} 17:12, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The article does not state what country we are talking about.

Fixed.

Lead: "plagued his term in office..." - makes it sound like they caused his political career problems, but then the sentence goes on to say "...leading to better safety practices and stricter law enforcement", which implies he made a policy success out of disasters not of his own making. I would therefore suggest just "during his term of office..." or something similar.

Fixed.

"Carroll left office under the cloud of an investigation of his administration and that of his predecessor ..." I don't know the solution, but this phrase is cumbersome, and possibly not grammatical (I couldn't decide!)

Yeah, I wasn't fond of it when I wrote it. I've reworded a little now. See if that helps.

"opened a car garage" (linked to Automobile repair shop). What other sort of garage is there other than a car one? Or just call it a car repair business.

Done.

The first para of the political career section appears to only have a cite towards the end. Is this all from Conn? Does anyone else verify that this was what the Kentucky legislature was like?

This is all from Conn. I've not found any other source to confirm it, but my access to news article archives don't go back that far.

"agreed to make the race" - have never heard this expression before.

I've run across it several times in expanding political articles, but I've changed it to something a little more universal.

"and ripped the sitting governor for not "doing something about it" - have never heard of this use of the word "ripped". What is meant?

Changed to "criticized".

Will come back to this. hamiltonstone (talk) 22:25, 31 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your review. There may still be some things you need me to address. If so, let me know. I may be off-wiki tomorrow through the weekend, but I'll try to get back to your comments soon. Acdixon ^{(talk • contribs • count)} 15:01, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Resuming[edit]

"With considerable experience in the General Assembly, first as Speaker of the House, and later as lieutenant governor, when he presided over the Kentucky Senate, Carroll exercised a great deal of control over the proceedings of the legislature." There's something wrong here. I think there is a surplus comma (or two), but I'm not sure. Is this what is meant: "With considerable experience in the General Assembly, first as Speaker of the House and later as lieutenant governor, Carroll exercised a great deal of control over the proceedings of the legislature when he presided over the Kentucky Senate."

I think that's it. hamiltonstone (talk) 11:42, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've tried to clean this up a little now, but if it needs more, I can break it into two sentences. The point is that he was the presiding officer in both houses, but in the Senate, it was the lieutenant governor who presided. (Later, that power was stripped from the office of lieutenant governor.) Acdixon ^{(talk • contribs • count)} 17:12, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Outside comments: I was planning on grabbing this article for review when I had a bit more time (after tomorrow), but I had noticed a couple things that should be rectified:

There are a couple of POV issues, particularly weasel words. For example, "Carroll's tenure was plagued by disasters": What does "plagued" mean? When did flooding strike Frankfort?

As noted above, I fixed the "plagued" issue. As for the flooding in Frankfort, I wish I knew. The author gives no date.

In places, I find the writing too informal (as partially noted above), such as "which had not gone for a Democrat"

Fixed this particular instance. Let me know if there are others.

First paragraph of Governor of Kentucky: "that also included Todd Hollenbach..." might be better worded as "against Todd Hollenbach..."

Done.

Pretty good otherwise; there are some minor prose niggles, so I may copy-edit the article after this review. Mm40 (talk) 00:10, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your comments. I would welcome your copy-edit or any additional comments. Acdixon ^{(talk • contribs • count)} 15:01, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Concluding review[edit]

All done, I've passed this at GA. Hope you'll consider doing a GA review of another article when you have the time. Cheers, hamiltonstone (talk) 22:44, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]