Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Bob McEwen old

Bob McEwen

Self nom. A profile of the former six-term Ohio congressman who is running in the special election to replace Rob Portman. Yes, I know it needs a photo (there's some here if someone would like to add them), but it is detailed, has references, external links, see alsos, etc. PedanticallySpeaking 18:11, May 25, 2005 (UTC)

• Strong oppose--very POV. In the first sentence, e.g., there was "who denounced government spending, unless it was to be in his district". Accurate as it may be, it's pretty clearly making a judgement about his fitness. Further down, the same assertion is made. It also says that (paraphrase) "his attention to foreign matters led to his receiving a zero from the Consumer Federation of America". Should we really be attributing causes this way? This article is problematic. Refer to PR. Meelar (talk) 21:48, May 25, 2005 (UTC)

I have redone the lead to attribute the bit about pork spending in his district. The Consumer Federation bit was to show that he was criticised for his attention to foreign affairs at the expense of domestic ones. PedanticallySpeaking 18:31, May 26, 2005 (UTC)

Still object, but improving. A couple problems with this article. First of all, there's the section on "In the spotlight in his last term". The last half of it, essentially, is one long, critical quote. It's not really an encyclopedic treatment, nor very neutral. Secondly, there's this sentence: "His attention to foreign matters over domestic ones was one reason he was given a "zero" rating multiple times by the Consumer Federation of America for his votes on consumer issues."--can we know this is true? Maybe the CFA gave him a zero because he really hated consumers. Maybe it was because certain businesses donated to his campaign. Who knows? the point is, we can't attribute a cause like this without a source. Finally, the House Bank scandal should be more fully explained, especially since the article itself is a redlink. Meelar (talk) 19:02, May 26, 2005 (UTC)

Deleted consumer sentence completely. An explanation of the House Bank scandal really goes beyond the scope of this article, which is why I put a link to the article I hope someone will write in the future. The key point is that he bounced checks, which is stated in the article. PedanticallySpeaking 20:21, May 26, 2005 (UTC)

I cut down the Gottlieb quote in question. No, it is not a neutral quote but quotes from others do not have to be neutral. I am trying to show how he was perceived and this quote shows one of the papers covering his district didn't think much of him.
I have added a few words of explanation about the House bank and some additional quotes from McEwen himself taken from the Congressional Record. PedanticallySpeaking 14:34, May 27, 2005 (UTC)

I still object, but this is getting much closer. My only problems now are the lead, which is still non-neutral. Is there any reason to include the Cleveland Plain Dealer quote? Most articles on politicians don't quote hostile editorials in the lead section. Also, you might want to check links such as this one [1]--all the Library of Congress links that don't go to actual bills are broken. Getting much closer now. Meelar (talk) 17:10, May 27, 2005 (UTC)

• Object. If you want to see a quality NPOV article, try to model this on the Barack Obama FA. Harro5 23:56, May 25, 2005 (UTC)

If the McEwen article violates the NPOV guidelines, it seems to me the Obama one does too. PedanticallySpeaking 18:31, May 26, 2005 (UTC)

• Weak object. Length is good. Just needs some NPOV'ing and a picture, if possible. --Merovingian (t) (c) 15:49, May 27, 2005 (UTC)

• Regretably, I must oppose. Here are my reasons:
  1. Having previously directed Representative William Harsha's re-election campaigns to Congress in 1976 and 1978, McEwen ran for Harsha's seat when he retired in 1980 and was elected to the U.S. House of Representatives in what The Washington Post called "a fail-safe Republican district."

     I would very much like to see a reference to the newspaper article that said this, using Template:Ref and Template:Note, along with the reference in the references section.

  2. The lead section is interesting, however I believe that the quotation from Tom Deimer should be going into the main body of the article — as it stands now having this in the lead section seems to be inferring that Wikipedia's position on this policitian concurs with Mr Deimer, which is clearly not the case because of our NPOV policy. My suggestion would be to put this into "Congressional career" and to, again, properly reference that quote to give us more specific information so we can verify the quote and check the context of that quote.
  3. The Chillicothe Gazette would salute him for his work on funding for U.S. Route 35, a limited access highway linking Chillicothe to Dayton

     Source? add to notes and to references

  4. Perhaps it would be better to rephrase "McEwen was not a man to mince words." Perhaps this is true, however I feel that this is a little POV to say so... however, others may disagree so this is a minor point. The fact that you backed this up is excellent, however, but nonetheless I would urge a rewrite of the paragraph. Take this point as you will.
  5. Martin Gottlieb of the Dayton Daily News thought McEwen's performances showed why he had remained in the background previously... (etc)

     Source to article?

  6. who the Dayton Daily News said "is an unknown small businessman who hasn't thought things through"

     Source to article?

  7. Martin Gottlieb of the Dayton Daily News said "McEwen was collateral damage" to Gingrich's crusade.

     Source to article?

• Will look into this further, must do other stuff now. Sorry! - Ta bu shi da yu 05:08, 29 May 2005 (UTC)