This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Matthew Charles Johnson article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Matthew Charles Johnson (final version) received a peer review by Wikipedia editors, which on 20 August 2024 was archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article. |
Matthew Charles Johnson has been listed as one of the Social sciences and society good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. Review: June 14, 2024. (Reviewed version). |
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
A fact from Matthew Charles Johnson appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 26 May 2024 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|
According to the disambiguation guidelines, the criterion to naturally resolve any ambiguity in an article title is preferred to using parenthetical disambiguation. This draft should be re-titled "Matthew Charles Johnson" as that appears to be the subject's birth name and would be a better choice than using a parenthetical disambiguator. Also, if parenthetical disambiguation must be used, then it also needs to be precise and enduring. The subject's status as a prisoner is only temporary, as he could be released on parole after 32 years, or might die in prison, and if either of those events occur, he would no longer be a prisoner. However, having been convicted of murder, and receiving a life sentence for that crime, he could be classified as a "murderer", since this is the crime he appears to be most notable for. - Cameron Dewe (talk) 00:42, 30 March 2024 (UTC)
The result was: promoted by PrimalMustelid talk 11:14, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has less than 5 past nominations.
Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.GMH Melbourne (talk) 05:04, 18 April 2024 (UTC).
Article is new and long enough. Sourcing looks good though Earwig found a handful of word-for-word similarities with "theage.com.au" source. A minor issue with each of the proposed hooks: ALT0 says that Williams was Victoria's most high-profile prisoner - the body of the article supports that but the sources seem to claim he was just a high-profile prisoner. ALT1 says they threw feces at a member of the jury but the article and sources only say "excrement". Both hooks are interesting however. QPQ is not required so just need hooks fixed and that should be all. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 15:31, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Nominator: GMH Melbourne (talk · contribs) 12:48, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
Reviewer: Arconning (talk · contribs) 16:11, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
Guessing "para" means paragraph, would suggest for it to be spelled out, most style manuals say to shorten it "para." (chicago, Harvard p2, APA). I couldn't find anything in wikipedia's MOS. Let me know your thoughts. GMH Melbourne (talk) 07:29, 14 June 2024 (UTC)
Good Article review progress box
|
During my copy-edit, I found there is a fair bit of uncited text in the section "Criminal history". I also noted some uncited direct quotations within that section. I have marked these texts with [citation needed] tags. Because this is a Good Article and a biography of a living person, we must be mindful to properly cite texts. Per good article criteria, good articles are required to comply with BLP policy.
I also noticed two primary sources are used; one is the judgement in the case of Williams' murder from the Supreme Court of Victoria; the other is the investigation into Corrections Victoria relating to Williams' death. According to WP:BLPPRIMARY, court records and transcripts must not be used to reference BLP articles; these sources should be replaced with, or at least augmented with, secondary sources.
Why didn't the GA reviewer notice these issues? If these matters are not addressed within a reasonable time, the GA status of this article should be removed. Cheers, Baffle☿gab 01:52, 13 July 2024 (UTC)