From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Florida; If you would like to join us, please visit the project page; if you have any questions, please consult the FAQ. |
| Start |
This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.) |
| Low |
This article has been rated as a Low priority article |
| Additional information: |
|
|
|
|
This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status:
 Referencing and citation: not checked- Coverage and accuracy: not checked
- Structure: not checked
- Grammar: not checked
- Supporting materials: not checked
|
|
[edit] Featured Article candidacy comments (not promoted)
(Contested - July 12)
A rather obscure 19th-century Florida governor. This is the most the most information from one source anyone can get on the Internet. Neutrality 05:29, 13 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- Oppose. There's no lead section so I wouldn't know why he deserves an article until the fourth paragraph. It's a nice short article otherwise, but not detailed enough for featured status. If there's not enough information on the internet, I'm sure there should be plenty in print for those dedicated enough... --Jiang 07:57, 13 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- Expanded lead section. Neutrality 22:44, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- While a 2 sentence introduction is an improvement from 0, it is still too short. →Raul654 02:37, Jul 15, 2004 (UTC)
- it's not too short given the size of the article; it's the article itself that's too short. --Jiang 02:52, 15 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- Agree with Jiang. Too short, not detailed enough for FA. blankfaze | (беседа!) 10:38, 13 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- Oppose, uses
non-free image image without clear copyright status information. anthony (see warning)
- I'm confused by the image's copyright status. If it's from the government website, isn't it public domain? Anthony, since you have done more research on this area, can you clarify this image's status? - DropDeadGorgias (talk) 14:50, Jul 13, 2004 (UTC)
- No. It's from a state government web site, and U.S. states do not all put their publications in the public domain. California does, AFAIK, but Florida doesn't. I've updated the image description page to give the source and a pointer to the applicable copyright statement. Using the image in this article may be fair use, but the image is certainly not PD. Lupo 15:11, 13 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- Wow, thanks. Is there a wikipedia topic with all of the various government websites and their copyright status? - DropDeadGorgias (talk) 16:33, Jul 13, 2004 (UTC)
- This is all irrelevant, because it's not a work of the state of Florida, it's a work of the artist who drew it (and therefore it has passed in the public domain). Neutrality 23:37, 13 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- And how do you know that the painter didn't transfer his rights to the state of Florida? Might be a possibility, especially for an "official portrait", don't you think? Lupo 14:21, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- Wikipedia:Avoid copyright paranoia. Do you have any evidence that this is routinely the case? - David Gerard 14:37, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- Your reference to copyright "paranoia" is unwarranted. I'm only trying to point out that this image may not be in the public domain. A prudent assumption, given that it is published on a Florida state government website which does claim copyright. Lupo 14:45, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- Object; the article is likely too short, as evidenced by the list "Other notable events during Fleming's term include"; surely these notable events should be expanded? — Matt 21:25, 18 Jul 2004 (UTC)
