Talk:Jacques Damala
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
Jacques Damala was a good article nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There are suggestions below for improving the article. Once these are addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. Reviewed version: December 26, 2006 |
 |
This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Greece, an attempt to expand, improve and standardize the content and structure of articles related to Greece. | ||||||
| If you would like to participate, you can improve Jacques Damala, or sign up and contribute in a wider array of articles like those on our to do list. If you have any questions, please consult the FAQ. | |||||||
| B | This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale. (comments) | ||||||
| Mid | This article has been rated as a Mid priority article | ||||||
|
|||||||
 |
Jacques Damala is within the scope of WikiProject France, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to France on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please join the project and help with our open tasks. | |
| B | This article has been rated as B-Class on the Project's quality scale. (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments, explaining the ratings and/or suggest improvements.) |
|
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page. | ||
| B | This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ] | ||
[edit] Failed "good article" nomination
This article failed good article nomination. This is how the article, as of December 26, 2006, compares against the six good article criteria:
- 1. Well written?: yes, rather well written
- 2. Factually accurate?: several facts without citation or sufficient verifiability under WP:V, omits discussion of important topics regarding subject.
- 3. Broad in coverage?: see discussion below, omits discussion of important topics regarding subject.
- 4. Neutral point of view?: yes
- 5. Article stability? seemingly
- 6. Images?: yes
When these issues are addressed, the article can be resubmitted for consideration. Thanks for your work so far. --ExplorerCDT 06:10, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
This rating does not meet the criteria for a "A" class article. It needs many more citations to even reach "GA" class. Please review the criteria and reassess. Jeffpw 14:29, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
Rationale for tagging: Not only are their allegations of his own bisexuality, he was married to Sarah Bernhardt, herself bisexual, and was an important part of her life.
Rationale for A-class: This article is well-written, exhaustively cited, and comprehensive. An A-class article does not have to be a GA article to qualify (see here for more on how this works), it simply has to meet the standards set, which I believe this article does. It could do with some work, particularly in the introduction, trivia and formatting references section, but nothing really serious that disrupts the content. This article is far from being a B. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 16:26, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
- Dev it is not exhaustively cited. The reference supporting the claim of bisexuality traces back to a Usenet page, and the source it quotes only gives one sentence of rumor. I support WJBscribe on this one. Jeffpw 17:22, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
-
- Yes, there's only one brief mention of bisexuality in the article, and while finding references of someone's sexuality from the 1870's is difficult, there's not much to suggest that this one belongs "within our scope" (sorry, Dev, for that word). I'm not keen on including it in LGBT studies, but I'm not strongly against it. Furthermore, the language needs a cleanup pretty bad, and there's some issues of NPOV. I'd rate it as a B, but with a little work in could be GA. -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 19:09, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
- The usenet you seem so against is quoting a book - we can change the reference to the actual book if you like. But it's there. Damala liked boys, ergo he falls under our range. I do not think that someone needs to be as gay as Oscar Wilde to fall into our sphere of interest! As to the A-class, this article is better quality than a B, and the guideline I linked to in my ratonale makes clear that an article can be rated an A if it has not been nominated a GA. Ok, if it makes GA, let's reconsider, but until then, it ought to be left alone, or a request for clarification made of the 1.0 editorial team. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 21:57, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
- All the quoted paragraph from the book says is: "and was said to have an eye for the boys as well". It is completely inconclusive. It reports period rumour- and it is unclear if this means he was actually rumoured to have had sex with males. It is about as weak as evidence of someones bisexuality could get... - WJBscribe (WJB talk) 23:49, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
- The usenet you seem so against is quoting a book - we can change the reference to the actual book if you like. But it's there. Damala liked boys, ergo he falls under our range. I do not think that someone needs to be as gay as Oscar Wilde to fall into our sphere of interest! As to the A-class, this article is better quality than a B, and the guideline I linked to in my ratonale makes clear that an article can be rated an A if it has not been nominated a GA. Ok, if it makes GA, let's reconsider, but until then, it ought to be left alone, or a request for clarification made of the 1.0 editorial team. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 21:57, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
- Yes, there's only one brief mention of bisexuality in the article, and while finding references of someone's sexuality from the 1870's is difficult, there's not much to suggest that this one belongs "within our scope" (sorry, Dev, for that word). I'm not keen on including it in LGBT studies, but I'm not strongly against it. Furthermore, the language needs a cleanup pretty bad, and there's some issues of NPOV. I'd rate it as a B, but with a little work in could be GA. -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 19:09, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
- Even more on point, there are 6 paragraphs without referencing at all. This is clearly failing of GA, let alone A class. The criteron for "A"states: At the stage where it could at least be considered for featured article status, corresponds to the "Wikipedia 1.0" standard. This article simply doesnt meet that. My final recommendation is to remove the LGBT template and let the GA nomination decide what the rating should be. Jeffpw 20:19, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
- Search as I might, I cannot come up with any information on this person's liking for boys. The quote as it stands is unusable since it is not properly documented. Someone would have to dig up this book and go through it to find what it really says. So, as it stands I would take the template away for lack of evidence, until further notice. Haiduc 04:28, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
- As it seems consensus on this topic has been achieved, I have removed the LGBT template. Jeffpw 07:56, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
I've ordered this book from my library. We'll see what it says. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 08:05, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
I should point out that I *did* get this book out of the library (and incurred a five pound fine, grr) and the extracts on the Yahoo group are all that is in the book about his liking for boys. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 10:14, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
[edit] From the author of the article
Hey, I've written this article, word-to-word, and had no idea it was nominated as a good article. Great news! Of course, it failed the nomination but still I'm glad (I hadn't entered this article for quite some time now). I hope it improves in the future, either by me or someone else. Xanthi22 03:57, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
