Talk:Frederick H. Bealefeld III

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Article reads like advertisement[edit]

This strikes me as a glowingly positive portrayal of a very controversial figure in Baltimore. Who wrote this? (I'm new) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.62.239.31 (talk) 08:25, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Frederick H. Bealefeld III. 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) 08:25, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Did you know nomination[edit]

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Bruxton talk 20:08, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • ... that a great-grandfather and grandfather of a commissioner of the Baltimore Police Department also served the department? Source: Sentementes, Gus (February 4, 2007). "Frederick H. Bealefeld III". Baltimore Sun. pp. B3. Retrieved February 9, 2024.

5x expanded by Queen of Hearts (talk). Self-nominated at 20:30, 11 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Frederick H. Bealefeld III; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.[reply]

This was suggested offwiki by Pretzelles, and probably flows better:
QueenofHearts 04:03, 12 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Article is new and long enough (RPS expanded 26× on February 11). No concerns with Earwig and sourcing looks good in the article. Hook fact is interesting and cited inline, and the given citation checks out. Preference to ALT1 for flow and simplicity. QPQ completed so we're good to go. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 07:35, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]


GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Frederick H. Bealefeld III/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Queen of Hearts (talk · contribs) 22:55, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: Tails Wx (talk · contribs) 15:15, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Starting review on this GAN! Great work on expanding this article from a one-sentence stub to... this! This'll take up to one week. Thanks! :) ~ Tails Wx (🐾, me!) 15:15, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Tails Wx and thanks for offering to review the article! I never expected this article to get picked up so soon, so there's still some rough edges. Could I please have a few days to fully flesh out the article? Thanks and sorry for the inconvenience, QueenofHearts 08:03, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, no worries, Queen of Hearts! I'll pause my review for a few days to let ya continue your work on the article. I'm sorry if I started too early; I was ecstatic in reviewing a GAN for a commissioner or chief of a police department, as I did write Kevin Davis! ~ Tails Wx (🐾, me!) 17:53, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Friendly nudge, Queen of Hearts, it's been nearly two weeks! :0 ~ Tails Wx (🐾, me!) 02:11, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Another nudge since you've edited after the one above, Queen of Hearts! If this is not responded to, I unfortunately may have to fail this review due to inactivity. ~ Tails Wx (🐾, me!) 02:21, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Tails Wx, I am sorry that this has taken so long; if I do not get back to you in the next few days, please fail this. Queen of ♡ | speak 19:51, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

  1. Is it well written?
    A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
    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:
  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: