# Talk:Douglas P. Woodlock

This article was automatically created by a perl script. It could use a human's loving touch. Polbot (talk) 01:40, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
This article was also assessed by the same bot. (explanation) Polbot (talk) 03:19, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:Douglas P. Woodlock/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Eddie891 (talk · contribs) 02:18, 27 April 2020 (UTC)
I'll take this on soon. Eddie891  Talk Work  02:18, 27 April 2020 (UTC)


### comments
Senior status duplinked in the lede
United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts duplinked in the body
"member of Skull and Bones" maybe say what 'Skull and Bones' is, I don't think that's common knowledge
"Chicago Sun-Times from 1969 to 1973, Chicago Sun-Times, first in Chicago" huh? perhaps you mention the Sun-Times one time too many? It's certainly duplinked
"served on the Georgetown Law Journal" maybe -> "worked for The Georgetown Law Journal"?
"He was in private practice in Boston, Massachusetts from 1976 to 1979, and again from 1983 to 1986, at the law firm of Goodwin, Procter & Hoar; in the interim, he was an Assistant United States Attorney of the District of Massachusetts" I think you could phrase this more chronologically, I don't see the need for 'in the interim'. Try something like "He was in private practice in Boston, Massachusetts, at Goodwin, Procter & Hoar from 1976 to 1979 and then served as an Assistant[...] before returning to Goodwin, Procter & Hoar from 1983 to 1986." Now this may need to be broken up into multiple sentences or phrased differently, but the benefit is twofold: 1) erased ambiguity over whether he was at Goodwin, Procter & Hoar from only 1983 to 6 or both spans, and 2) the sentence no longer leads the reader on, leaving them asking what he did in between until later, instead listing it out right away
Surely you can put images in somewhere?
You might consider combining some of the "notable cases" into larger paragraphs- right now it seems really blocky
could you add identifiers to his 'works'? that way a reader can track them down quickly
Is the Biographical Dictionary of Federal Judges actually used? If not, I'd suggest removing or placing in a further reading section
I don't see his birth date actually cited
"lawyer in private practice and in government positions" was he a lawyer in government positions, or merely in government positions? Clarify.
Nicely done, that's most of my comments, probably some more to come

Eddie891: Thanks! I made some edits in response to these points - very helpful. Hard to find a free photo to use of Woodlock, however. I could put in one of the Boston courthouse that he is closely associated with. Neutralitytalk 02:51, 28 April 2020 (UTC)
Neutrality, Yeah, that would work-- I just think it would be useful to have some sort of illustration Eddie891  Talk Work  11:56, 28 April 2020 (UTC)
Eddie891: Image added. Neutralitytalk 18:58, 28 April 2020 (UTC)
Neutrality, Sourcing comments follow:
all sources are reliable
cites should be in numerical order, but that won't play into pass/fail of this article at a GA level
a spotcheck shows no obvious omissions or wrong citations
#29 should mention the author as 'Daniel Uria'
no close paraphrasing/copyvio
Please note these minor quibbles, but they are not sufficient to hold up promotion, and I will happily pass this as a GA. Nice work, and congrats! Eddie891  Talk Work  23:12, 28 April 2020 (UTC)
Thanks, Eddie891 - I made the ref tweaks and it looks good now. Thanks for the review. Neutralitytalk 14:17, 29 April 2020 (UTC)