Wikipedia:Peer review/Williamson County, Texas/archive1

Williamson County, Texas edit

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review for two reasons:

(1) Re the chart of Presidential election going back to 1960. Wouldn't this be better in a narrative form? Do other county pages have such election charts? It seems to me the chart takes up a substantial amount of room compared to the overall article length, far exceeding it's importance compared to the rest of the article. Is each yearly result all that important...or is the importance the change from Democratic to Republican voters over time as the county has grown? What about citing the influence of Sun City voters in the county? Etc. In short: Can it just be deleted?

(2) The timeline of history contains numerous references to early exploration of Texas and statehood unrelated specifically to Williamson County. Should it be deleted in its entirety (I am too tired to re-write it for someone into a narrative, but someone probably should). I've already deleted an entire seperate timeline on slavery twice (pasted above). Should the timeline stay in or be delted? (PS - we are moving quickly into the Three Revert Rule on the adding or deleting of the slavery timeline.)

Thanks, Austex • Talk 18:30, 2 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The chart of presidential elections should go. If there's a trend or an important takeaway it can be identified in the prose. If it has to stay, there are more efficient ways of representing all that information. I don't know why each election needs an entire table when you're just presenting three pieces of information (year, D %, R %) for each one.

I agree that the timeline should be in a narrative form. And the information about Texas in general is out-of-scope for the article. (There can always be a See also: History of Texas or something.) But I don't think it should be deleted if it includes things that aren't written elsewhere. —Designate (talk) 14:40, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

My thoughts exactly, but I did not want to delete them without another opinion. I'll do so now but make note of it in the edit section so someone can revert if needed. And I guess I'll get started on writing the history narrative. (what an undertaking). The non-county dates in history are well documented in other articles. This article so far has taken a great deal of time to clean up, and I fee like I'm only half way there. Austex • Talk 19:56, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]