Wikiwand AI

Talk:Jamieson Greer

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Feedback from New Page Review process

I left the following feedback for the creator/future reviewers while reviewing this article: Thank you for creating the article! Have a wonderful and blessed day!

✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 06:59, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

More liberal bias, as usual.

“Cheerleader”. Seriously? You could’ve used a far more neutral term, like “supporter” or “proponent” as it relates to Greer’s views on Trump’s tariff policies. Also, you should’ve added that Trump paused the implementation of his tariffs for 90 days after other nations expressed a willingness to negotiate with the United States. 2600:100D:B085:4821:6122:5FA3:8E28:DBDB (talk) 09:22, 20 April 2025 (UTC)

Changed to "supporter" per WP:NPOV; the page already includes the 90 day pause. Please keep in mind WP:CIVIL as Wikipedia is a work-in-progress and volunteer editors don't always pick the best wording the first time, but accusations of POV editing are insulting. BBQboffingrill me 23:20, 20 April 2025 (UTC)

Reasoning for keeping cn in infobox

User:Mewulwe has brought up an issue regarding the need for a citation in the infobox. I’m not sure it’s necessary - maybe citing it in the lead or career section, or leaving the [citation needed] tag there, is enough. Thoughts? TimeToFixThis | 🕒 08:54, 6 October 2025 (UTC)

If there was a cite elsewhere, there would be no need for one in the infobox. But if the information itself is dubious, then the tag belongs anywhere the information is repeated. Mewulwe (talk) 08:59, 6 October 2025 (UTC)

GA review

Passed. Wikipedian12512 (talk · contribs) 18:21, 18 June 2026 (UTC)

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.

This review is transcluded from Talk:Jamieson Greer/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: ElijahPepe (talk · contribs) 17:29, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

Reviewer: Wikipedian12512 (talk · contribs) 23:18, 15 June 2026 (UTC)


More information Rate, Attribute ...
Rate Attribute Review Comment
1. Well-written:
1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.
1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, list incorporation, and table accessibility.
2. Verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check:
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.
2b. 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).
2c. it contains no original research.
2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.
3. Broad in its coverage:
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.
6b. media are relevant to the topic, have suitable captions, and have alt text.
7. Overall assessment.
Close

First read through:

Info box:

  1. Maybe, in addition to the “years of service” dates, add the length?
This isn't possible in any template I've seen and not a GA requirement. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 01:49, 16 June 2026 (UTC)
I think it's a bit better without the date range, but you do you. In solidarityWikipedian12512 (Talking is fine | contribs) 15:35, 16 June 2026 (UTC)

Lead:

  1. Maybe link the first instance of China?
Agreed, done. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 01:49, 16 June 2026 (UTC)
  1. Instead of having “according to the New York Times” at the end of the lead, have it as a source (against MOS:CITELEAD, but fine in this scenario).
No, it is against CITELEDE. The content is already in the body. It does not need to be cited again. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 01:49, 16 June 2026 (UTC)

Early life and education:

  1. Maybe change the title to ignore the date range?
Not a GA requirement; having the date range there is fine. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 01:49, 16 June 2026 (UTC)
  1. Move the first citation to the end of the sentence.
Done. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 01:49, 16 June 2026 (UTC)
  1. The “early life” area seems a bit amiss if it doesn’t eventually have a “personal life” area. Maybe add that?
A personal life section is not required and not the way the article is written. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 01:49, 16 June 2026 (UTC)
  1. Remove “and” in the last sentence of the first paragraph of early life and education.
The source says that he worked "as a dishwasher and at McDonald's", not that he worked as a dishwasher at McDonald's—which, as far as I'm aware, I'm not sure that McDonald's has dedicated dishwashers. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 01:49, 16 June 2026 (UTC)
  1. Did he learn to speak any other languages?
No. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 01:49, 16 June 2026 (UTC)
  1. Perhaps define stagiaire? Link?
I linked it, but it is such a specific term that the word "stagiaire" has to be used. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 01:49, 16 June 2026 (UTC)
I mean giving a brief definition of the word in the paragraph. In solidarityWikipedian12512 (Talking is fine | contribs) 15:18, 16 June 2026 (UTC)
I changed it regardless. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 16:54, 16 June 2026 (UTC)

Military service:

  1. Remove date range from heading and add to paragraph.
Not a GA requirement. Adding a specific range to a sentence would be redundant, but I did specify that his service ended in 2012. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 01:51, 16 June 2026 (UTC)
  1. A second paragraph wouldn’t be amiss here. Could you find sources to support another?
This is the extent of the sourcing that I found. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 01:51, 16 June 2026 (UTC)

Career:

  1. Perhaps give an overview of the section between "Career" and "Legal work"?
An overview is not necessary. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 16:54, 16 June 2026 (UTC)

Legal work:

  1. Put the citations at the end of punctuation. It would be helpful to do this for the entirety of the article.
Done. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 16:54, 16 June 2026 (UTC)

Chief of staff...:

  1. Possibly link Lighthizer again? It's probably better to at least the first name.
Done. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 16:54, 16 June 2026 (UTC)
  1. In the "a trade war," possibly define "trade war"?
I do not believe that is necessary. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 16:54, 16 June 2026 (UTC)

US trade...:

  1. Perhaps change "decicive" to something better?
Agreed, changed. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 16:54, 16 June 2026 (UTC)
  1. The tariff link makes me think that it links to tariffs. I see this in a few other places in the article. Maybe go around and look at those to either give more clarification as to where the link goes or change what it's linked to?
The phrase is connected to "and trade policy", so it is not supposed to go to the tariff page. The page for Trump's tariffs is a natural link for "Trump's tariff policy" or "his tariff policy". elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 16:54, 16 June 2026 (UTC)

Tenure:

  1. "According to the New York Times"- could you give a source?
A source is provided in the next sentence and does not need to be duplicated. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 16:54, 16 June 2026 (UTC)
That's not obvious enough where I feel like it could pass WP:V. In solidarityWikipedian12512 (Talking is fine | contribs) 18:53, 16 June 2026 (UTC)
No, the policy is WP:CONSECUTIVECITE. You do not need to cite two sentences in a row with the same citation. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 18:59, 16 June 2026 (UTC)
I still disagree, but sure. In solidarityWikipedian12512 (Talking is fine | contribs) 21:33, 16 June 2026 (UTC)
  1. "Has supported" doesn't flow in my opinion. Not necessary, but it would be preferable if you change that.

Acting positions:

  1. "Trump named"- Named is a bit off here. Perhaps "Trump appointed"?
No. Appointment would suggest that Greer could serve immediately. Trump can only name a nominee for the Senate to approve. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 19:01, 16 June 2026 (UTC)
  1. Maybe change the title to something more clear?
The title is concise. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 00:45, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

Views:

  1. Change heading to "Political views"
Not a GA requirement. These aren't political views, they are economic views, and at that some of them aren't entirely economically-motivated. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 00:45, 17 June 2026 (UTC)
  1. "...he agreed with president Donald Trump's trade policy (linked)"- I think that "he agreed with [[whatever link you used|Donald Trump's trade policy]]".
I disagree, but done. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 00:45, 17 June 2026 (UTC)
  1. "Greer supports" sounds a bit off. Perhaps "Greer is in favor of"?
"supports" sounds fine to me. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 00:45, 17 June 2026 (UTC)
  1. "tougher economic policies"- is there a specific reason to use tougher? Perhaps "stricter," or another word?
I disagree, but done. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 00:45, 17 June 2026 (UTC)
  1. Is there a page on "Phase One trade deal" to link to? If not, a redlink might be warranted, otherwise it gives the impression that it's common knowledge.
There is no page for it, and I do not believe that a page could be created that would not otherwise duplicate its mention on the trade war page. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 00:45, 17 June 2026 (UTC)
  1. The sentences in the section feel too simple. Perhaps merging some would be nice?
I don't know what this comment means, but the split is intentional. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 00:45, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

Image captions:

  1. First one: Perhaps change "Official portrait, 2025" to "Official portrait, as of 2026" or just "Official portrait"?
Not a GA requirement. The year that the portrait was taken is important and only the year that it was taken should be mentioned. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 00:45, 17 June 2026 (UTC)
  1. Second one: Perhaps remove "ceremoniously"?
The swearing in was ceremonious. Greer had already been sworn in as the trade representative months prior. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 00:45, 17 June 2026 (UTC)
Maybe ceremonial then? In solidarityWikipedian12512 (Talking is fine | contribs) 11:41, 17 June 2026 (UTC)
Done. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 16:42, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

Image requests:

  1. Are there any army or early life ones? They would be quite helpful.
There may be images, but I cannot verify their copyright status. Only images created by the U.S. military or otherwise had their copyright elapse are usable. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 00:45, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

Basic suggestions:

No hard ones.

Spot source check of 7:

  1. 37- good
  2. 5 (came up twice)- doesn't support "Greer's service ended in 2012."
  3. 5 (second one)- good
  4. 18- good
  5. 40- good
  6. 35- good
  7. 22- I don't want to subscribe, changing to 23.
  8. 23- good.

Another 7 (two were repeats, so I removed them)

  1. 6- good
  2. 9- good
  3. 13- good
  4. 15- good
  5. 18- good
  1. Could you go over your sources to check that they're all supporting your claim?

On hold

@ElijahPepe: I’m putting this on hold until the sources are fixed. In solidarity Wikipedian12512 (Talking is fine | contribs) 01:28, 18 June 2026 (UTC)

@Wikipedian12512: I couldn't verify that sentence in any of the sources, so I removed it. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 02:21, 18 June 2026 (UTC)
Okay. I’ll check another seven. Thanks! In solidarity Wikipedian12512 (Talking is fine | contribs) 02:23, 18 June 2026 (UTC)

Final requests:

  1. I feel like it talks about Lighthizer a tad too much. Could that be fixed? My preferred method would simply be to change the subject of the sentence from Lighthizer to Greer. For example, “Lighthizer appointed Greer for X position”-> “Greer was appointed by Lighthizer for X position”.
The article talks about Lighthizer frequently because he was Greer's superior and was directly responsible for much of his career trajectory. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 14:26, 18 June 2026 (UTC)
I know, and it's an easy fix. In solidarityWikipedian12512 (Talking is fine | contribs) 14:59, 18 June 2026 (UTC)
No, it would be clunky to replace "Lighthizer, the United States trade representative, named Greer as his chief of staff" with "Greer was appointed by Lighthizer, the United States trade representative, as his chief of staff." elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 15:26, 18 June 2026 (UTC)
Yes, but after the introduction, you mostly can just do that. In solidarityWikipedian12512 (Talking is fine | contribs) 15:56, 18 June 2026 (UTC)
I'm not seeing any problematic sentences. If you see an issue, you are free to edit the article, even as the reviewer. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 16:31, 18 June 2026 (UTC)
Got it. I'll fix the things I want, then I'll pass. In solidarityWikipedian12512 (Talking is fine | contribs) 18:10, 18 June 2026 (UTC)
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.

Related Articles

Timelines

Top Qs

Fact Checks