Talk:United States Tax Court
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
United States Tax Court was a nominee for Social sciences and society good article, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There are suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. | |||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Taxation, an effort to create, expand, organize, and improve tax-related articles to a feature-quality standard. |
| Assessment ratings and other indicators given below are used by the Project in prioritizing and managing its workload. | |
| B | This article has been rated as B-Class on the Project's quality scale. |
| Mid | This article has been rated as mid-priority on the Project's priority scale. |
 |
After rating the article, please provide a short summary on the article's comments page to explain your ratings and/or identify the strengths and weaknesses. |
[edit] "Deficiency" versus "assessment"
In the first line of the article, I changed "assessments" to "deficiencies." Technically, when the matter arrives at the Tax Court, it's a "deficiency" as "determined" by the Commissioner of Internal Revenue. There is no "assessment" until after the Tax Court decides the case -- and the "assessment" is made by the Commissioner, not by the Tax Court itself. Also, the meanings of both terms are now discussed in the article. Famspear 23:05, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Tax Court judges
I've coppied stubby bio info from the Tax Court website to make individual pages for the 32 judges - some have yet to be touched by the miracle of wikification, so any help with that would be appreciated. Cheers! BD2412 T 03:26, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Good article nomination on hold
This article's Good Article promotion has been put on hold. During review, some issues were discovered that can be resolved without a major re-write. This is how the article, as of December 10, 2007, compares against the six good article criteria:
- 1. Well written?: Yes,
but please move the list of judges to a separate article. - 2. Factually accurate?: No, please add citations where I put 'fact' tags.
- 3. Broad in coverage?: Yes
- 4. Neutral point of view?: No problem
- 5. Article stability? Stable
- 6. Images?: Ok
Please address these matters soon and then leave a note here showing how they have been resolved. After 48 hours the article should be reviewed again. If these issues are not addressed within 7 days, the article may be failed without further notice. Thank you for your work so far.— Ruslik (talk) 09:04, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
Hello to all; I will take a look at this, hopefully tonight. Yours, Famspear (talk) 17:09, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
Well, it looks like I won't get to this 'til later in the week. Stay tuned. Famspear (talk) 04:56, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
- Are you going to add citations? The article can be on hold for one week only. Ruslik (talk) 20:18, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, I will try to get to this later tonight. Yours, Famspear (talk) 23:17, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
- I will wait only until Friday. On this day I will fail the article if citation issues are not resolved. Ruslik (talk) 08:04, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
- If it's not up to GA standards by Friday, we'll resolve whatever is wrong when we can and try again another time. I'm going to take pictures of the Tax Court in a week or so (now that I'm situated in the area). Plenty of good articles have not made it on their first go. Cheers! bd2412 T 00:50, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
- I will wait only until Friday. On this day I will fail the article if citation issues are not resolved. Ruslik (talk) 08:04, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, I will try to get to this later tonight. Yours, Famspear (talk) 23:17, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
Dear Ruslik0: I have a feeling I am not going to be able to find sourcing for the remaining items that are tagged. What should be done in a situation like this? Should the material simply be deleted? Famspear (talk) 16:52, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
- I will fail the article. However after you find necessary sources (I think it will take some time) you can renominate the article. Please, contact me and I will promote it if there is no other issues. Ruslik (talk) 07:42, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
As I promised I am going to fail the article today, but when you are ready to renominate it, please, feel free to contact me. Ruslik (talk) 13:56, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
