Talk:William Rehnquist/GA1
GA Review[edit]
I delisted this article almost a year ago. However, two of my concerns have not been adressed yet:
- 1) The lead does not satisfies WP:LEAD. It is too short (please expand to 4 paragraphs) and fails to summarize the article. It should include a better summary of judical phylosophy of Rehnquist, not only his position on federalism.
- 2) Every case mentioned should have a citation. Since some cases are cited using {{ussc}} template, please, use it.
After reading the article again I have additional suggestions:
- 3) Some statements need citations. I put {{cn}} tags.
- 4) The sections about Placidyl Addiction and Personal health should be merged.
- 5) Section about Analysis of Tenure as Chief Justice should be removed—it is basically a POV albeit well cited and it adds nothing to the article. There are other POV statements in the article. While I removed several of them, some remain. For example: the supposed three principles of his jurisprudence outlined in Associate Justice section. I doubt that Rehnquist himself ever formulated them in such a form. This is an opinion of a commentator.
I will place the article on hold. Ruslik (talk) 09:18, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
- Anyone who seriously studies Rehnquist would agree that the three principles of jurisprudence as outlined were a good guide for what Rehnquist's votes were like. Why does Rehnquist have to have formulated them that way himself? He did outline a view of jurisprudence early on in his judicial career, but went on to violate it many times. RafaelRGarcia (talk) 11:03, 22 September 2008 (UTC)