Talk:Kash Patel/GA1

GA review

Closing this since this review appears to have been abandoned. ElijahPepe (talk · contribs) is encouraged to resubmit at GA in order to find another reviewer. Bgsu98 (Talk) 10:37, 16 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Nominator: ElijahPepe (talk · contribs) 06:54, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: PickleG13 (talk · contribs) 21:32, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Well-written

Starting from the totally solid lead paragraphs, this is a great article, one that meets the Good Article standards and does so despite having a massive amount of prose to go through. The prose deserves praise in itself, easily rising to the level of Wikipedia's standards.

Verifiable with no original research

No original research appears to be present. Sourcing is good, and it broadly relies upon mainstream news sources; there are sometimes more sources than even appear necessary, which is a trait that I will never knock a page for.

Broad in its coverage

There is a high degree of specificity in a lot of sections, but Education shows that attempts were made to keep things broad. Much has been written about Patel's life as a major governmental figure.

Neutral

The prose is very neutral. Patel is necessarily controversial, but controversy is handled well.

Stable

This is the one part of the page that I would dispute, although I think it is still overall of high enough quality as to be nominated. Patel is very controversial, and the usage of the term "conspiracy theorist" has come under Talk Page discussion in the past. It has now received less weight, seemingly to reduce the number of edit wars rather than as a true reflection of its quality. As a result, it's likely that this page will continue to come under dispute throughout the second Trump presidency, something worthy of discussion.

Illustrated

There are a lot of good images that are part of this page. Even his law school is given its own image, something that I believe is a mark of an attempt at a high quality biographical article.

User:ElijahPepe and User:PickleG13: What is the status of this review? Bgsu98 (Talk) 14:05, 10 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bgsu98 I do not know. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 05:00, 16 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above 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.