Talk:Charles J. O'Byrne

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Former good article nomineeCharles J. O'Byrne was a Social sciences and society good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
April 27, 2008Good article nomineeNot listed
September 4, 2010WikiProject peer reviewReviewed
Did You Know
A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on April 8, 2008.
The text of the entry was: Did you know ...that Charles J. O'Byrne, Secretary to Governor David Paterson of New York, is a former priest who officiated at the marriage of John F. Kennedy Jr. and Carolyn Bessette in 1996 and presided over their funeral in 1999?
Current status: Former good article nominee

Second in command?[edit]

Surely in the official sense the Lt. Gov is second in command - in fact, what does "second in command" mean in this context? – ukexpat (talk) 19:38, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In the sense that the White House Chief of Staff is the "second in command" to the President in terms of Advisors, etc. Historically, the Secretary to the Governor is the most powerful position in Albany, wielding much more actual authority then the Lieutenant Governor. I will be expanding on that, I'm still getting most of the bio typed off offline. Check back in a few hours and let me know what you think and how it should be edited. MrPrada (talk) 19:42, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Copyedit[edit]

Copyedited by ukexpat (talk), a member of the Guild of Copy Editors, on 19:06, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GA review[edit]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

This article is in decent shape, but it needs more work before it becomes a Good Article.

  1. Is it well written?
    A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
    Well, I've done some research and I couldn't find a source for his B-Day and stuff, so I'm not going to make that a major issue to the review. But, if a source can be found, please add it. In the lead, Ref. 1 needs to be added after David Paterson, as its describing what he does or did. Same section, "He is openly gay", can that be re-worded, as it sorta sounds strange. Same section, please add a link to "Colombia Spectator". Same part, "During college, he took a summer job in the New Jersey Attorney General's office, and at 22, became acting superintendent of elections and acting commissioner of registration in Monmouth County", this sentence should be split and 22 should be written as twenty-two. Again, "and officiated at the marriage of John F. Kennedy Jr. and Carolyn Bessette in 1996", shouldn't "the" be removed? New section - Priesthood, "During his studies in Cambridge, he acted as Harvard Law School's chaplain, and worked as a teaching fellow at Harvard University with Robert Coles, a Pulitzer-prize winning author", it would be best to re-word the sentence to ---> "During his studies in Cambridge, he acted as Harvard Law School's chaplain, and worked as a teaching fellow at Harvard University with Pulitzer-prize winning author, Robert Coles". Article in Playboy magazine, is "boyologist" the meaning to "priests who held an unnatural interest in young male parishioners", if so, then please add a comma before the reference. Throughout the article, there tends to be a lot of "he", try to even out he and O'Byrne. In the Political career, there are two "In", can one be removed?
    B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
  2. Is it verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check?
    A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:
    B. Reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose):
    C. It contains no original research:
    D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:
    B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
  4. Is it neutral?
    It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
    "Considered a confidant to the Kennedy family", needs to be re-written as it sounds like POV.
  5. Is it stable?
    It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
  6. Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
    A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:
    B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:
    If the statements above can be answered, I will pass the article. Good luck with improving this article! Also, contact me if the above statements are answered.

--  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 01:26, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've decided to fail the article, since its a week since the GA review. If the statements above can be addressed, then the article may be renominated for GA. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 21:05, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Survey[edit]

WP:Good article usage is a survey of the language and style of Wikipedia editors in articles being reviewed for Good article nomination. It will help make the experience of writing Good Articles as non-threatening and satisfying as possible if all the participating editors would take a moment to answer a few questions for us, in this section please. The survey will end on April 30.

  • Would you like any additional feedback on the writing style in this article?


  • If you write a lot outside of Wikipedia, what kind of writing do you do?


  • Is your writing style influenced by any particular WikiProject or other group on Wikipedia?


At any point during this review, let us know if we recommend any edits, including markup, punctuation and language, that you feel don't fit with your writing style. Thanks for your time. - Dan Dank55 (talk)(mistakes) 03:31, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

To all editors here[edit]

Today, 7 May 2009, I reverted a few edits that had left the article with various technical problems. If you feel there is need to remove any of the sourced information here, please do so in a clean way, without leaving all kinds of reference errors. Thank you. Debresser (talk) 19:08, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 external links on Charles J. O'Byrne. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:23, 20 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Charles J. O'Byrne. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:31, 3 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Charles_J._O%27Byrne&oldid=1212615201"