GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (
|
visual edit |
history) ·
Article talk (
|
history) ·
Watch
Reviewer: Cryptic C62 ( talk · contribs) 20:41, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
There are a lot of problems with this article. The biggest issue is that this article is not a comprehensive account of the subject. The following cases are not mentioned in the article:
As I am not an expert on American law, I will readily concede that not all of these may be particularly important. However, it is somewhat concerning that the number of potentially relevant cases which are not mentioned exceeds those that are mentioned.
The use of scholarly journals is commendable, but where are the book sources? The following books discuss the compulsory process clause, and some even have entire chapters dedicated to the subject. This is just a small sample, as I am sure there are countless others that could be useful.
Once the comprehensiveness issue has been addressed, there are other problems that need to be taken care of:
These problems are not insurmountable, but they are significant enough that they should have been addressed before submitting the article to GAN, not during the review. I am closing this nomination. Feel free to contact me if you have any questions about the points I've mentioned. -- Cryptic C62 · Talk 20:41, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (
|
visual edit |
history) ·
Article talk (
|
history) ·
Watch
Reviewer: Cryptic C62 ( talk · contribs) 20:41, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
There are a lot of problems with this article. The biggest issue is that this article is not a comprehensive account of the subject. The following cases are not mentioned in the article:
As I am not an expert on American law, I will readily concede that not all of these may be particularly important. However, it is somewhat concerning that the number of potentially relevant cases which are not mentioned exceeds those that are mentioned.
The use of scholarly journals is commendable, but where are the book sources? The following books discuss the compulsory process clause, and some even have entire chapters dedicated to the subject. This is just a small sample, as I am sure there are countless others that could be useful.
Once the comprehensiveness issue has been addressed, there are other problems that need to be taken care of:
These problems are not insurmountable, but they are significant enough that they should have been addressed before submitting the article to GAN, not during the review. I am closing this nomination. Feel free to contact me if you have any questions about the points I've mentioned. -- Cryptic C62 · Talk 20:41, 17 June 2012 (UTC)