Talk:William H. Wilbur

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
Start	This article has been rated as start-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]
	This article is supported by the Military work group.

	This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
Additional information and associated task forces: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: criterion met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met Associated task forces (general topics): Military biography task force Associated task forces (nations and regions): United States military history task force Associated task forces (periods and conflicts): World War II task force

	Chicago Portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chicago, which aims to improve all articles related to Chicago.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on the quality scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

	William H. Wilbur was a nominee for History 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.
	An entry from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know? column on October 10, 2008.
December 12, 2008 Good article nominee Not listed

[edit] WikiProject class rating

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 14:40, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] GA Review

Hi, I'm afraid that I think this article needs substantial work before it can become a GA. I will lay out the problems below and if you believe you can address them within seven days then by all means do. If you don't think that is possible or don't manage to reach the level in the time then I am afraid I will have to fail the article as it stands.

• The biggest problem here is comprehensiveness. The article is about a man's life and yet 2/3 of the text are given over to him winning the medal of honor. For some MoH recipients, thais is fair as they were young men killed in the action in which they won the medal. For William Wilbur however, this is not the case: No information is given about birth, parentage, education or childhood; He served in World War I but no details of where ot in what capacity are given; there is nothing whatsoever on his life between 1918 and 1942; after his exploits in Torch, there are only the very barest details of must have been an interesting and active military career during the war; after 1947 he appears to have been fairly prominent political advisor yet there are almost no details of this period; almost nothing is mentioned of his life between 1952 and 1979, including greater details of his retirement, subsequent work or family (other than one mention of his son). This includes information regarding his law enforcement and writing career.
• More sources are required to provide the information needed above and provide a rounded picture of his character.
• There maybe other problems to be addressed once the above are dealt with.

Far more is needed before this article can reach GA I'm afraid. Please let me know your opinion if that level of work is achieveable or not.--Jackyd101 22:46, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Its been ten days and nothing has happened. I'm afraid this article has failed GA, sorry its not a bad start but is nowhere near comprehensive enough in its current state. Better luck next time.--Jackyd101 (talk) 09:47, 12 December 2007 (UTC)