Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Jon Burge/1

< Wikipedia:Good article reassessment

Jon Burge edit

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch article reassessment page • Most recent review
Result: Keep per improvements made and comments below. Geometry guy 12:41, 18 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This article fails on points 1, 2 and 4 of Good Article Criteria. Its a mess.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Jbracken77 (talk • contribs) 02:27, 3 October 2009

  • Speedy Keep. Looks fine to me, easily passing the criteria. Without more specific identification of problems, and an unsigned nomination from an inexperienced editor, there seems little reason for a reassessment. No problems have been brought to the talk page either.YobMod 11:31, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Just a reminder that GAR doesn't assess the nomination (let alone the nominator), but the article. However, in this case, the nominator's concerns can be gleaned from his contribution to the article prior to listing it here. I comment below. Geometry guy 12:46, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
As his edit was not reverted, those changes cannot be his reason for delisting. The prose is clear and the spelling and grammar are correct and it complies with the manual of style. I agree the long distance call quote needs a source, and the description of that method of torture should be cited to the officer who his describing his understanding of the procedure. That this method usually result in confessin is in the source, in less formal language.YobMod 18:34, 5 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Can you be more specific? - I still can't find the reference for "usually result in a confession" and this is presented as an unqualified statement of fact, not an impression. As for the nomination, as I indicated below, the nominator probably gave up trying to improve the article part-way through. Thanks for your help, Geometry guy 08:32, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Citation 1 has: "rig up a field telephone and put one [wire] around a finger and the other around the scrotum and start cranking. And they would eventually tell you what you wanted to know..." I took that to be the source for the confession sentence. But this is from a military officer describing the torture method in general, so should be made clear in the article that this is not a direct report on what was done during police interrogations, but an expert opinion on that type of torture. Something like "They allegedly used an old crank telphone to generate electicity...., decribed as a "black box" by alleged victims. According to veteran seargeant D. J. Lewis, this is a method of torture common in the Korean war (where Burge served), and usually results in a confession. Burge has denied ever witnessing such telphone torture procedures."YobMod 10:58, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Much improved now - many thanks for the clarifications. Geometry guy 09:21, 7 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy Keep This article should be watched as the trial approaches, but it is not in violation of WP:WIAGA.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 04:25, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. It doesn't seem such an easy pass to me. The nominator fixed some issues with unencyclopedic prose, verifiability and neutrality up to the "Torture methods" subsection, and it seems to me that problems continue in that subsection.
    • The first sentence has "he was in Mercy Hospital and Medical Center with multiple lacerations to his face and scalp, numerous bruises on his chest and what a doctor diagnosed as second-degree burns to his right thigh." which is not much of a paraphrase of the source material: "Wilson was taken to the emergency room at Mercy Hospital and Medical Center with multiple lacerations to his face and scalp, numerous bruises on his chest and what a doctor diagnosed as second-degree burns to his right thigh."
    • The last paragraph of that subsection ("Burge and other Chicago Police officers allegedly...") appears to have the opposite problem. I can't find the first allegation in the source, nor the reference to "long-distance calls", which gives the impression of a synthesis. This is not helped by the use of in the moment tenses such as "They would use..." nor (in particular) by the unsourced sentence "This would usually result in a confession". "At one point he is even alleged..." contains an editorial moral judgement that torturing 13 year olds is worse than torturing adults. The penultimate sentence is awkward: I don't understand what "regularly" means, and "on or up their rectum" is not very accurate (the rectum is inside, so it might be clearer to use "anus", the opening, and "into" instead of "up"!).
The rest of the article seems to be in better shape, but I would encourage other reviewers to look carefully at an article on a controversial matter concerning a living person. Geometry guy 12:46, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
A repeat source has been added ("Mysterious Third Device" is part of "Tools of Torture"), but I still can't find "long distance call". Can someone point me to it? Thanks, Geometry guy 08:32, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I removed that quote, and re-ordered tha paragraph and rewrote the telephone torture sentences. I think it flows better, and puts the accusations into better context, but feel free to revert.YobMod 11:06, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! Geometry guy 22:35, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Good_article_reassessment/Jon_Burge/1&oldid=1138522522"