Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Archived nominations/May 2007
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] May 2007
- The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.
The article was not promoted 16:58, 22 May 2007.
[edit] Trams in Adelaide
Self-nomination: A comprehensive article on Adelaide trams. Currently listed as a good article and has been helped along by the recent peer review. Well referenced with all free images. Appearsto meet all of the featured article criteria. - Peripitus (Talk) 11:11, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
- Oppose - this article is not quite good enough for FA in my opinion. I don't think the article is as well-written as some of the earlier FA candidates that have come from Adelaide - It's almost there and the good work on the article is commendable, but needs substantial work before an FA grade would be justified. What I would like to see is:
- Proofreading and writing - I'm not an expert or knowledgeable on this subject, but from a preliminary read, it is obvious that there are inaccuracies in the article - for example, the article says in one place that the last tram in Adelaide was purchased in 1953. Considering that the Flexicity trams began service in 2006, I don't see how this could be correct. I would like to see the article rewritten where possible to make it an excellent piece of writing as well - (the lead is good though).
-
Doing... - this was an oversight as the sentence only referred to the trams purchased by the MTT so the paragraph was correct but incomplete. Now extended - Peripitus (Talk) 11:32, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
- That may be done, but the rest of the page needs proofreading too, but I would expect that would be done after you've fixed the remaining sections. Good work anyway. JRG 04:39, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
-
- History - this is my major concern. There really isn't any substantial information on the history of trams in Adelaide - it only tells me when lines were opened and closed, and how far they extended. Information on the need for trams in Adelaide isn't there. Why, for example, was there a need to build tramways at all in Adelaide? What prompted the Government or private companies to build the lines in the first place? All the good Wikipedia articles on railway or tramlines in the world tell us how and why the networks were built in the first place (see MTR, or Singapore MRT. While I wouldn't expect masses of exquisite details (that would be the place for the particular line articles, were they ever to be written), I would think some substantial information on the background to the construction of tramways in Adelaide would be necessary.
-
-
- There's also no information on the history of the network between 1909 and the 1950s when the network closed, apart from the mention of the MTT and the rise of the motorcar and bus services in the 1920s. What happened in these fifty years? Any extensions to the network (and if so, when and why)? Anything else that's interesting or notable?
- There's also no information on recent history of the network - for example, I know that there were options in the 1970s/80s to extend the Glenelg line underneath the city through tunnels and on the present O-Bahn route out to Paradise and the northeast of the city, but this didn't go ahead. Perhaps some information on the Governmental attitude towards trams would be good (in modern times - it's already well covered on the decline section in the 1950s).
- Headings and sections - the headings and sections are a bit of a mess. If I can make a suggestion, I would move your sections around into the following (don't use my wording though): history of the tram network (subsections on horse-drawn trams, then electric trams, then trolleybuses, then decline, then recent history); tram infrastructure (on the tram vehicles themselves); then a short section on the status of trams at present and the future of trams in Adelaide.
Timeline - it doesn't serve have a purpose as the information is already covered elsewhere in the article - I'd get rid of it.
-
-
- Tram vehicles sections - Some more work is needed here - some of the tram types are written adequately (eg. the Types A, B and E) are quite ok, but the rest could do with some expansion - maybe tell us what lines they operated on, etc. The Flexity paragraph, despite being the most recent tram (and probably the one with the most information available on it), is only two lines and is unreferenced (though I suspect it's a very recent edit). I wonder if you might think about a better way of presenting the information - the table and information being separated isn't ideal.
Maps - can you redo the maps so there is a better indication of where the tramways extended to - in the electric tram map, for example, none of the extents of the southeastern suburbs are labelled. For someone not familiar with Adelaide's suburbs, it's quite hard to work out where these lines would have gone.
-
- Pictures - any chance of some pictures for the current status section (like of the Glenelg tramline)? There's some on the Glenelg Tram page if you want to just transfer them across, although the current tram extension would provide the opportunity for some photos (or just go and take a picture of a typical Glenelg tram stop)... the tram vehicles section would also be improved with some more pictures.
These are some suggestions - I hope these can be taken on board. I'm not too worried about the pictures, but everything else I would like to see fixed before I will change my mind. If you want suggestions just ask. JRG 03:48, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for the indepth commentary - I'll (hopefully) sucessfully address these in the next day - Peripitus (Talk) 08:42, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
- Oppose—needs a copy-edit. I've done the lead as an example of the density of work required. Some of it arises from personal preference; most doesn't. One inline query. In particular, it's significantly over-linked. Delink dictionary words such as "garden", to focus your readers on the high-value links. Tony 22:55, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
- Agreed and thanks for the editing. Re-reading the article in light of the above comments shows me that it's not up to standard. I'll be working on it this weekend but I think it's unlikely that it'll be near ready soon enough - Peripitus (Talk) 11:43, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.
The article was not promoted 16:58, 22 May 2007.
[edit] Mimi Smith
This article on the aunt and guardian of John Lennon is mostly the work of andreasegde (talk · contribs) on whose behalf I am nominating. I will also endeavour to make myself available to answer questions and criticisms.
The article is a Good Article and has undergone a peer review. I believe it meets or is very close to meeting the relevant criteria, and welcome your criticisms so we can give it that final push or indeed, hopefully, your support.
One final note: Mimi Smith is deceased, and there is no free image available of her that we know of. Help sourcing a legitimately fair use image is most welcome. --kingboyk 15:57, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
- "People that knew Mimi well have stated that she was a very stubborn and determined person." I don't think there's any way a sentence like this will stand without a reference - I don't know one way or the other about the truth of it, but is it really necessary anyway? Tvoz |talk 09:34, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
- It's a fair summary of her character - and a defining trait if you will, so yes it's important - from the biographies I have read (that's biographies of Lennon/The Beatles, in which she plays a prominent role in Lennon's early years). Of course, Mimi is no longer with us so we have no WP:BLP concerns, however if this article is Featured we must aim for the highest standard. So:
- Everything in the lead must be repeated and expanded on and referenced in the body. If that isn't true of this statement, I think we need to improve the body rather than tack on some citations in the lead.
- We might remove the statement from the lead altogether, and let the information in the body do the talking; the reader can then draw their own conclusions.
- Do you have any further comments based on what I've written, or any suggestions as to how best deal with this concern? --kingboyk 10:54, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
DoneI changed the comment to mirror what is in the text, but have now taken it out, as Tvoz's concerns were correct. andreasegde 14:06, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
- Support Very interesting read. Spelling and punctuation looks good. I'm no expert at prose, but it read quite smoothly to me. Well referenced. Cricket02 03:04, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
Oppose for now.The article is a nice read, but there are some portions I feel uncomfortable with. These are:- The lead section should conform to WP:LEAD, in particular that it should be sourced as appropriate. It should also be self-contained, but the mention of the Stanley family is definitely not self-contained, because it hints at some important info in the rest of the article. Dates of birth and death should be wikified, and the abbreviations b. and d. should be deleted (see WP:MOSNUM). Also her maiden name should be included in the bolded part (Mimi Smith (née Stanley) (see WP:MOSBIO)
- Related to that, the text on her career does not expand what is written in the lead, and as such is repetitive. Either expand on the career section, or remove her career from the lead.
- I've fixed the style issues, and it looks much better, thank you. With regards to your other points, I'm not sure I understand. The lead should be a summary of the article, something which can stand alone. No uncontroversial points need to be cited in the lead, provided the body is well referenced. Anything in the lead must be covered and ideally expanded on in the body. That's my understanding of how to write a lead; presuming you agree with me could you give me a little more information about what is wrong with the lead please? I'd like to fix it but I'm not seeing the problem :) --kingboyk 16:24, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for fixing the style issues. The only issue remaining is that I think the lead should not contain Mimi's career as that is such a minor part in the article, but could possibly be expanded with Mimi's attitude towards John's marriages, which receives far more attention in the article, but is not covered in the lead. Errabee 21:41, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
- I've fixed the style issues, and it looks much better, thank you. With regards to your other points, I'm not sure I understand. The lead should be a summary of the article, something which can stand alone. No uncontroversial points need to be cited in the lead, provided the body is well referenced. Anything in the lead must be covered and ideally expanded on in the body. That's my understanding of how to write a lead; presuming you agree with me could you give me a little more information about what is wrong with the lead please? I'd like to fix it but I'm not seeing the problem :) --kingboyk 16:24, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
Done
-
- The Stanley family bit should be told from Mimi's perspective alone and begin by explaining Mimi's relation to the Stanley family. As it is now, this section starts rather enigmatically. Also, I fail to see the relevance of Mimi's mother hating the devil's English; it is not used anywhere. The story about Leila's friendship with John Lennon has nothing to do with Mimi and I think it should be removed (but something that needs to be included in the John Lennon article, if it's not already there).
- I've commented out the piece on Leila. I don't think it's important; she's not a major figure in any Beatle book I have read. Whether or not the sentence belongs in an article on Mimi Smith is, I think, a little less clearcut than you believe. Mimi was the defacto matriarchal head of the Stanley family; a family who aren't covered seperately on Wikipedia. --kingboyk 16:41, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
- The other objections I pass to Andrew. Please rewrite or refactor to meet with Erabee's approval, thanks mate. --kingboyk 16:46, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
- I'm not denying that Mimi was the defacto matriarchal head of the family, but focus on her relations with the individual members of the Stanley family instead of focusing on John's relations with individual members. I miss Mimi's relations with Mater, Nanny and Harrie, and others. Errabee 21:41, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
- The Stanley family bit should be told from Mimi's perspective alone and begin by explaining Mimi's relation to the Stanley family. As it is now, this section starts rather enigmatically. Also, I fail to see the relevance of Mimi's mother hating the devil's English; it is not used anywhere. The story about Leila's friendship with John Lennon has nothing to do with Mimi and I think it should be removed (but something that needs to be included in the John Lennon article, if it's not already there).
Comment I would have loved to know more, but everything that is in the article is everything I could lay my hands on. She wasn't given to being interviewed, and although she loved John, she distanced herself from his music as much as possible. I have lined through the issues above that have been dealt with. They were all excellent points, and I wish I had noticed them before.andreasegde 18:44, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
-
- Penny Lane now links to the Beatles song. That seems to me to be an incorrect use of wikilinks. Either remove this link, or explicitly mention the Beatles song, which can then be linked.
- I will fix this by linking to the street, which for now will link as a redirect with possibilities to the song. This needs to be done anyway, as Penny Lane is incorrectly categorised. --kingboyk 16:46, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
- The section heading John is not very descriptive. Perhaps something like Influence on John Lennon would be better?
- We can do something better than "John", but not "Influence on..." please. Remember, this woman raised him; we're not talking "Elvis' influence on The Beatles" or such things :) --kingboyk 16:41, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
- I've changed it to ==Mimi and John Lennon==. How does that grab you? If you don't like it, can you suggest something else? --kingboyk 17:43, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
- The pictures seem to be not very specific (e.g. terraced houses, harmonica, Siamese cats (is this actually one of the cats owned by Mimi or not? The caption appears to be a contradiction), Lennon rehearsing), while I miss a picture of Mimi herself.
- Fair point; we don't have a free image of Mimi. Andrew can you try to find a non-free image of Mimi? I'll take care of the fair use claim. --kingboyk 17:43, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
- (later more) Errabee 00:27, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
- Still in the Stanley family section: why is performing a matriarchal role opposed to being dressed conservatively?
- Good question. I've added a {{fact}} tag to the matriarchal role statement (I'm sure it's true, but let's have a citation), and I've removed the strange "dressed conservatively" juxtaposition. Andrew you might want to put that statement back, with a citation, into a better position if you think it's important. --kingboyk 17:43, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
- What changed her mind with regard to her getting married? Just the ultimatum? I got a feeling from the previous paragraph that that wouldn't be enough.
- This is another one for Andrew, the scholarly gentleman in possession of the books. --kingboyk 19:49, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
- Penny Lane now links to the Beatles song. That seems to me to be an incorrect use of wikilinks. Either remove this link, or explicitly mention the Beatles song, which can then be linked.
Comment Nobody has ever written about it, and Mimi never liked interviews, but Jackie Dykins claims in her book that Mimi never had sex with George, and had a long-time affair with a student lodger. I found that too ridiculous to put in. Maybe Mimi thought Mendips was the place in the suburbs where could "entertain the scholars of the day", and took George for all he had. It's just speculation... andreasegde 19:27, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
-
- I'm not sure if the influence of Mendips on John Lennon should be put in this article.
- Nor me. Anybody else care to comment? As I mention below, Mimi is notable because of Lennon and because of Lennon only, and Mendips is important in her life story. Of course we need some material on it. However, the question is "how much?", given that a seperate articles does exist (251 Menlove Avenue). --kingboyk 19:49, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
- The introduction of the section John is very unclear. It should be made clear from the start that this section is about Mimi's involvement in Lennon's life. I think it is unclear for me, because it isn't explained that John Lennon is Julia's first child. This part could use a copyedit as well for grammar. Furthermore, I think it focuses too much on John Lennon's childhood experiences with other people; e.g. when Lennon was informed about George's death is (imho) not necessary in this article, nor is Lennon's reaction to Julia's death. I would like to know what Mimi's reaction was to the acquittal of the officer.
- I'll take a look at this now. Thanks. --kingboyk 19:49, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
- Definitely needed trimming and refactoring; which I've now started (diff for my work so far provided below). --kingboyk 21:19, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
- I'm still working on it, but having just removed some commentary on John's feeling about the deaths of George and Mimi, I absolutely agree that more reaction from Mimi is desirable. Andrew, do the sources help? --kingboyk 22:55, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
- Andrew says the sources don't expand on Mimi's reaction. If nobody asked her and wrote it down, there's nothing we can do, sorry :) --kingboyk 11:22, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
- I suppose that at some time Cynthia and John moved out of Mendips. I'd like to see that mentioned in Cynthia's section, because the change from Julian's birth to Harriet's funeral is too large a mental leap for me.
- The section on Yoko focuses too little on Mimi's reaction to Yoko.
- I'm not sure if the influence of Mendips on John Lennon should be put in this article.
Comment Mimi was very cagey about Yoko, and although she thought John was being stupid whilst with Yoko (in the Cynthia section) she found out that Yoko owned her house in Poole, so was understandably wary. She even said that Yoko was a good mother, which doesn't sound like Mimi at all! andreasegde 19:14, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
-
- Does the Beatles template really have to be included?
- Summary of this commentary: this article's focus should be more on Mimi, and less on John Errabee 10:28, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
- Mimi is notable solely because of her familial relationship with John Lennon, and most of the sources about her are from Lennon biographies. I think, then, that's it not unreasonable for the article to dwell on Aunt Mimi in Lennon's life. That said, if you have any more specific objections about material which is superfluous, or important biographical information which is missing, we'd be most pleased to hear about it. Thanks. --kingboyk 19:49, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
Thank you Errabee. Let nobody accuse you of being anything less than thorough! :) I will work through your recommendations now, and respond on a point by point basis where necessary. Thanks again. --kingboyk 15:59, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
- Changes so far. Will finish off later. --kingboyk 21:19, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
- I have a query/suggestion now, sorry andreasegde! I've refactored and copyedited (in part) the "Mimi and John Lennon" section
- Do we need to have a seperate "Mimi and Lennon's music" section? Might we perhaps trim the 2 sections just a little and merge them?
- My editing has left this sentence "stray"; it doesn't really belong where it is. "Lennon was accepted into the Liverpool College of Art with help from Mimi and Lennon's headmaster, as Mimi was insistent that Lennon should have some sort of academic qualifications." Can it be moved? Where would it fit best?
- Oh, one other point before anybody else seizes on this. It's usual in biographies to refer to people by their surname, as using the forename is usually seen as over-familiar. However, I believe this case should be an exception. Mimi is never referred to as "Smith" in any writing I have seen; she is always "Mimi" or "Aunt Mimi". "Aunt Mimi" would the over-familiar usage in this case, I believe. --kingboyk 23:09, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
- WP:MOSBIO is clear about this: To disambiguate between siblings or other well-known relatives with the same surname, use the surname of the article header to indicate that person, and use first names or complete names to indicate siblings or others. So Mimi should be referred to as Smith, but George should be George, and all the sisters by their first names. However, I find your suggestion quite good, and won't object to its use. Errabee 01:22, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
- Yep, but I contend that "Mimi" is rather like "Madonna", nobody calls her "Smith" (or "Ciccone"). Contrast this to a buddy-buddy article on, say, Gwen Stefani, where calling her "Gwen" would be a clear breach of MOSBIO. --kingboyk 11:22, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
- WP:MOSBIO is clear about this: To disambiguate between siblings or other well-known relatives with the same surname, use the surname of the article header to indicate that person, and use first names or complete names to indicate siblings or others. So Mimi should be referred to as Smith, but George should be George, and all the sisters by their first names. However, I find your suggestion quite good, and won't object to its use. Errabee 01:22, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
- I have done as much as was wanted, but I am getting confused about what more is needed. I will be more than happy to go through the comments, and I have lined through some, but could somebody point out, or Bold the worst bits? andreasegde 19:49, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
- I put the tasks I delegated to you onto your talk page, and also bolded your name above where your attention was needed. If you could check all those points have been covered that would be great. I'll be back later to have another look at this article and see if I can make sense of where we've got to :) In the meantime I've just come in from outside and am a bit hot and sweaty :) --kingboyk 20:01, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
- I think they have been done/I have done them all. I thank Errabee and kingboyk for their much-appreciated input. If there are any more comments, or any that I have missed, I would be happy to work on them. andreasegde 21:30, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
- I have a bit of a headache at the moment. If I can't comment/edit again tonight I'll be back tomorrow. --kingboyk 22:08, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
Done I think all my comments have been worked on, and I believe the article has improved considerably. I now fully support this article for FA-status. I just have two minor additional points, which I think are not important enough to withhold my support. These are:
- Mimi and Stanley Parkes went to a cellar where John was playing. Stanley Parkes is later referred to as Stanley. Shouldn't this be Parkes?
- Why did the Beatles' first trip to Hamburg shock Mimi?
I fixed those as well. andreasegde 13:19, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
Congratulations Andrew and Steve on a job well done! Errabee 23:02, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
- The article now has a fair use image of Mimi in the infobox (Image:Mimi Smith Laughing.jpg) and a fair use image of Mimi and John Lennon (Image:Mimi Smith and John Lennon.JPG). Please review the fair use rationales. --kingboyk 13:11, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
- Support The article seems rather comprehensive on such a minor topic. Lead may need expansion (maybe?), but that's it. LuciferMorgan 23:04, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
- Oppose. Formatting and prose issues (needs to be of a "professional" standard). Some of it is so trivial that I wonder how it can be paraded as among our best work ("she did have a stainless-steel double-drainer kitchen sink installed in 1961 that she was very proud of";
- "Complained about Lennon sleeping in the same bed as Julia and Dykins").
- Why are common, dictionary words linked? "Aunt", "nurse", "scholars", "dignitaries", "milkman", "marry"? We do speak English, and don't want to read blue-spattered text in which valuable links are diluted by useless ones. Needs a proper audit throughout.
I have taken the links out. andreasegde 23:30, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
- Not entirely happy with the prose; there's a certain conversational aspect to it that is unencyclopedic, such as "to buy a modest house in a respected suburb of Liverpool one day so that she could entertain the ..."
- "and before it grew too late he would burst into the back room and loudly order George home. The courtship lasted almost seven years, but George grew tired of waiting"—Ungainly repetition of "grew".
- Needs auditing for redundant "alsos". Tony 01:11, 10 May 2007 (UTC) [8]
- Oppose. From 1940 on, the article seems to tell us more about John Lennon than about the actual subject of the article. I realize her relationship to the musician is what makes Smith notable, but that doesn't mean there should be whole paragraphs that don't mention Mimi at all. The article also is still in need of copyediting. Here are some examples:
- "The Beatles' success later enabled Lennon to buy Mimi a bungalow in Poole, Dorset, where she lived until her death in 1992." Why not take out the "later" and instead write the year she bought the bungalow?
- I have fixed it and have put a date in. egde 03:00, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
- "...which meant that she had to look after the whole family". As opposed to looking after parts of the family? What is this supposed to mean exactly?
- "Despite this, Mimi always wore sensible dresses, and always looked as if she was on her way to a weekly garden club meeting." Sensible is definately POV. How someone looks when they're on their way to a weekly garden club meeting also differs from culture to culture. You can't expect everyone to have the same connotation with this. It would be better to just describe the kind of clothing she wore.
- "When other girls were thinking of marriage, ..." "her peers" or "most of her peers" would be more exact than "other girls".
- "With help from Mimi and Lennon's headmaster, Lennon was accepted into the Liverpool College of Art as Mimi was insistent that Lennon should have some sort of academic qualifications, even though Lennon was beginning to show an interest in music" Have you counted how often "Lennon" is repeated in that sentence?--Carabinieri 01:46, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
- Oppose, 1a, 1c, and 2. The WP:LEAD is inadequate, consisting of four sentences. Further, the TOC is nested to the third level, which would be suggestive of a very complex article — not a short article with a four-sentence lead. The prose is just not at all compelling (example: To aid her very absent-minded mother, Mimi had to take a matriarchal role in the Stanley house, which meant that she had to look after the whole family, and not just one or two of her siblings.) —and has many redundancies (example: After the birth of all of his daughters, Mimi's father retired from sailing and found a job with the Liverpool and Glasgow Tug Salvage Company as an insurance investigator.)
Several sources are missing publication dates.
- Comment: Which book sources are missing publication dates? egde 18:20, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
Many sources are not reliable: examples,
-
- A personal, tripod webpage and another personal webpage, home.orange.nl/robvdbijl/Im53.html
- Iamthebeatles.com
- solcomhouse.com
- pocketcat.blogspot.com
- and, it's not clear to me that lennon.net is a reliable source.
I don't think this article can make it from where it is now to FA. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:49, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
- These green check marks are irritating and misleading, and make it hard to read the FAC. It would be helpful if you would remove them, and let reviewers indicate whether they consider something done or not. No, the personal webpages have not been removed - there is still a tripod personal website, and the prose redundancy was only an example - you can't fix that one, put a green check mark, and consider it done. I made some sample edits to show you missing info that needs to be checked for on all sources. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:36, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
-
- I truly apologise for that, as I am fairly new to FA reviews. I will take them all out. Sorry. egde 20:08, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
- Oppose Although edge has worked hard on this and should be congratulated I really don't think that she is sufficiently notable to warrant FA status. She clearly played an important role in the life of an important Beatle, but had no achievements of her own, and on this principle we'd have FAs on every parent of every notable person - and why not every child as well - and every school they attended - and every significant teacher - and indeed anyone who was mentioned in several biographies about them. I also agree with the comments above about reliable sources. The fact is the whole thing is trivia and so understandably the sources are a bit trivial. NBeale 05:35, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
- Irrelevant to FAC and not actionable. --kingboyk 10:01, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
-
- Without wishing to be un-necessarily pedantic, one of the FA criteria is "appropriate length without going into un-necessary detail". Now the appropriate length for Mimi Smith is somewhere between a sentence and a couple of paragraphs. She has no notable achievements except being John Lennon's Aunt and Guardian. If you are interested in Beatles Trivia then there is a fair ammount of obscure stuff, but Mimi as far as I can see said and did absolutely nothing that would even be remotely notable but for the fact that she said it or did it to/about John Lennon. In fact according to the article her claim to have bought Lennon's first guitar was false and her main "contribution" to the Beatles was to be very hostile and discouraging. And much of the article is facts about Mimi that have nothing to do with her relationship with Lennon at all. Sorry, edge put in a lot of work but it would be ridiculous to make this a featured article - we might as well have one about some obscure Pokemon character. NBeale 19:52, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.
The article was not promoted 18:43, 15 May 2007.
[edit] Jack Coggins
A well-sourced, well formatted article with appropriate prose and illustrations. -- Avi 07:26, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
- Comment Footnotes need more info (access date, publisher's name). Also, read this, please. --Crzycheetah 07:16, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
- Footnotes have been upgraded and more information added. Is this acceptable? Not sure what is wrong with the placement of the ref tags though. Dave 01:57, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
-
- Avi fixed the placement of the ref tags. What is "further reading" in the refs supposed to mean? I think it's unnecessary. Also, replace "Accessed 13 April 2007" with "Retrieved on 2007-04-13" or vice versa. It just needs to be consistent.--Crzycheetah 05:39, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
- Thank you - I have done as suggested. Dave 07:16, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
- Avi - thank you for sorting out the footnotes and putting the hyperlinks to external information back into the main body of the article. I originally had them there, but some time back another editor didn't like that and said to use footnotes instead. I was never happy with that because I felt that they weren't really "references" as such, just links to further reading about a subject. I will put some more of them back into the text. Dave 04:39, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
- A pleasure. It was either that, or perhaps make true references into Harvard-style versions (Coggins 1978) and leave the notes as footnotes, but that would have been a lot more work
. -- Avi 06:05, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
- A pleasure. It was either that, or perhaps make true references into Harvard-style versions (Coggins 1978) and leave the notes as footnotes, but that would have been a lot more work
- Support It's been up long enough and no one has noticed any glaring problems. Neither have I. Good work.-- Zleitzen(talk) 00:55, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
- Oppose.
Riddled with external jumps (Wiki is not a blog) — external jumps either 1) belong in external links, or 2) should have their own Wiki entries, or 3) should be converted to references. Also, please read WP:DASH and correct throughout. Numerous WP:MSH issues.SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:10, 4 May 2007 (UTC)- The problem with making them all references is then it is difficult to separate the true reference from the link. One option is the way we have now. The other is to let the external links be footnotes and transform the references into harvard-style (as can be seen in Actuary for example). What do you suggest? -- Avi 02:08, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
- I have tried to comply with WP:DASH and WP:MSH throughout the article. I have created a new section as per WP:MSH called 'Further reading' and moved all the external links to that section. Does this satisfy all the requirements? Dave 05:57, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
- Those things are fixed, but there are new problems. I'm not entirely clear why there is a collection of websources in Further reading, which is where you would put additional sources for further exploring the topic of the article. Those seem to be External links, and it's not clear why they are all needed, per WP:EL and WP:NOT. Also, I intended to quickly fix some of your footnotes myself, and found that rather than using the cite templates, you have mixed the cite templates with {{citation}}, which is intended to be used with Harvard references. Not sure why the mix, but it looks like the citations need to be switched to cite templates to match the rest. Several of the footnotes are missing publisher, and it would be helpful to add the format = PDF parameter. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 11:26, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
- The use of {{citation}} is that it best fits magazine articles, for which the closest cite template is {{cite journal}} which has too many excess needed fields. Citation may be used with Harvard referencing, but it need not be. -- Avi 16:08, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
- You don't have to fill in every field. How do you add format = PDF to citation, because you need several of them. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:23, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
- OK, I have removed 'further reading' and the external web references completely now, which should solve that problem. I am a bit confused about the template issue though, so many to choose from, not sure what template to use where. Which references need publishers added? Magazines? Newspapers? If you could let me know I will attempt to fix. Dave 04:10, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
- I went in and fixed the citation templates for you; feel free to revert if you dislike the work. However, the problem was that you were using the citation template for journals, when you're actually citing Jack Collins website (cite web) for almost every single source. Basically, the entire article is sourced to jackcollins.info, which likely makes it less than a comprehensive or unbiased bio. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 04:45, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
- OK, I have removed 'further reading' and the external web references completely now, which should solve that problem. I am a bit confused about the template issue though, so many to choose from, not sure what template to use where. Which references need publishers added? Magazines? Newspapers? If you could let me know I will attempt to fix. Dave 04:10, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
- You don't have to fill in every field. How do you add format = PDF to citation, because you need several of them. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:23, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
- The use of {{citation}} is that it best fits magazine articles, for which the closest cite template is {{cite journal}} which has too many excess needed fields. Citation may be used with Harvard referencing, but it need not be. -- Avi 16:08, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
- That is a misconception, I believe. The JackCollins website serves as a convenience link. The references are the papers, which can be found on microfilm in any large library or the publications' morgues. Further, most of the copy are actual scans of the pages, also bolstering reliability. Note, that the citations are just as valid without the url links, although harder to check out. -- Avi 04:52, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
- (sp) JackCoggins ALTON .ıl 05:13, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
- Ah, well that's another story, which is why it's helpful to use the correct templates. (Our reverts crossed in edit conflict.) Have you actually verified each source independently from Coggins' own website? If so, would you like me to set up the citations correctly, to include all of the correct info and show convenience links ? Further, since these convenience links are often scans, are there copyright issues ? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 05:04, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
- The main sources of information for this article were references 1 and 2 which are completely independent of jackcoggins.info. The links to jackcoggins.info are used mainly for supporting images and information - I am happy to go with whatever the decision is on the use of jackcoggins.info as convenience links. As the author of jackcoggins.info I believe that I would be responsible for any copyright issues, not Wikipedia. However, as Avi points out, the papers and magazines exist and the references are just as valid without the links if is is decided to remove them. Dave 07:19, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
- That's incorrect; pls see WP:EL and WP:COPYRIGHT. Wikipedia should not knowingly link to copyright violations. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 12:38, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
- The main sources of information for this article were references 1 and 2 which are completely independent of jackcoggins.info. The links to jackcoggins.info are used mainly for supporting images and information - I am happy to go with whatever the decision is on the use of jackcoggins.info as convenience links. As the author of jackcoggins.info I believe that I would be responsible for any copyright issues, not Wikipedia. However, as Avi points out, the papers and magazines exist and the references are just as valid without the links if is is decided to remove them. Dave 07:19, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
- Ah, well that's another story, which is why it's helpful to use the correct templates. (Our reverts crossed in edit conflict.) Have you actually verified each source independently from Coggins' own website? If so, would you like me to set up the citations correctly, to include all of the correct info and show convenience links ? Further, since these convenience links are often scans, are there copyright issues ? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 05:04, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
- Those things are fixed, but there are new problems. I'm not entirely clear why there is a collection of websources in Further reading, which is where you would put additional sources for further exploring the topic of the article. Those seem to be External links, and it's not clear why they are all needed, per WP:EL and WP:NOT. Also, I intended to quickly fix some of your footnotes myself, and found that rather than using the cite templates, you have mixed the cite templates with {{citation}}, which is intended to be used with Harvard references. Not sure why the mix, but it looks like the citations need to be switched to cite templates to match the rest. Several of the footnotes are missing publisher, and it would be helpful to add the format = PDF parameter. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 11:26, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
(unindent — continued oppose) The External links, Further reading, and footnote formatting problem has been largely sorted out now (pending identification of jackcoggins.info as the publisher on several sources), although resolution of the copyright issue on convenience links remains. (If JackCoggins.info violates copyright, it shouldn't be linked to anywhere on Wiki, per WP:EL.)
Having now reviewed the sources and the article, I have a larger concern about the article's 1d — neutrality.
The article mentions that Coggins' relatives are in Australia; according to article stats, Dave (Dcoggins (talk · contribs) from Australia) is by far the main editor of the article and is the author of jackcoggins.info [13], and presumably related to Jack Coggins. A large portion of the article is cited to information he uploaded to jackcoggins.info, which is labeled in the article as a "reference site and tribute - created by his family". The article contains no criticism or critical review of Coggins' work, and WP:COI may be a concern. Critical commentary and review of an artists' work is necessary for NPOV. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 12:38, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
-
- Yes, I am related to Jack Coggins. We have been through this issue before, and I have tried to make the article as neutral as possible, using only verifiable facts, not opinion. It is not possible to add critical review of Coggins's work, because I have not been able to locate any. It's really back to the original problem, there are just not enough sources of information to satisfy the requirements of Wikipedia. I am unable to certify that there are no copyright issues with all the works that I have scanned on jackcoggins.info to satisfy Wikipedia's requirements either. I can understand caution, but it seems to me that Wikipedia just might complicate and regulate itself out of relevance. I have now decided that I have more important things to do with my time, so I am opting out of this altogether. If the articles are deleted, so be it. Thanks to those who have assisted me up to this point, and farewell. Dave 06:30, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
- Comment—there are several stubby paragraphs that should be integrated into larger ones. Prose doesn't look too bad as a glance, but I still recommend an audit. — Deckiller 00:41, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
- I have combined some short paragraphs, any further suggestions for improvements? Dave 04:10, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
- Some notes - The image could use a little more detail. Who took the picture, where, when, how? The four samples of art are missing Rationales. I think the article can be structured better, with the sections "Early Life", "Education", and "Family" made into sub-headers under a level 1 heading "History". Moreover, important biographical info should be separated from the section about his artistry, and put into the "History" section. "Awards" should be renamed to something more neutral (perhaps "recognition"), and contain possible criticism or whatnot. Giving an "Awards" section only seems biased. The "See also" should only contain a link to that one List. I realize the directory purpose of JackCoggins.org, but it does seem fishy to cite virtually only that one. Add a note below the <references /> stating the nature of the site. Shouldn't the flag of England be used instead of the UK's? I'm not sure. Is there anything in the article about the black lens in the picture? ALTON .ıl 05:13, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
- Comment. There are a couple of paragraphs in the "Post World War II" section that are unreferenced. Cla68 07:24, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
- Comment. Mostly looking at the prose:
-
- Jack Coggins also wrote and/or illustrated a large number of books on a wide range of subjects, as well as providing many illustrations for advertisements, magazine articles and magazine covers. - two additives ("also" and "as well") in one sentence; arguably you don't need either. Use of three vague size terms ("a large number of books", "wide range of subjects", "many illustrations") which should be improved. I'm not sure whether using "and/or" is alright - I find it jarring but you'd need to check with someone more knowledgeable.
- captured many war time scenes from the front lines. - use of "many" is again vague (in this case it could probably be removed outright).
- the only child of Ethel May (Dobby) - I can't follow the meaning of "Dobby".
- Use of the phrase "Jack Coggins was born in" twice in two sentences.
- Coggins's father - while probably implicit you're talking about the subject's father, why not just use his full name to avoid any ambiguity?
- As a result of - slightly wordy, perhaps could be "due to" or "because of".
- Coggins had always been interested - not strictly accurate - interests aren't something you always have, they develop over time.
- as hostilities had already erupted in Europe - "already" is redundant.
- the then-art director - I think it's implied that he was the art director at that time. As Paxton isn't really commented on much, you can probably remove the slightly clumsy "then-".
- this was possibly Coggins's earliest published work - I'm left wanting to know why it might not be his earliest published work. If anymore is known, perhaps add it in brackets afterwards?
- it set the direction of much of his work for the next five years, and showed the meticulous style of his future artistic output. - critical commentary so really needs citing.
- That's just looking over the first few sections, so could probably do with a pretty thorough copyedit throughout. Trebor 09:12, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.
The article was not promoted 00:11, 12 May 2007.
[edit] United Nations Security Council Resolution 1747
This article meets Wikipedia's featured criteria in my opinion. United90 22:01, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
-
-
- United90 (talk · contribs) has three edits to Wikipedia; nominating this article was the account's first edit. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:58, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
-
- Comment. I see the Current Event tag is up. I don't know if this article is stable enough. --Lenin and McCarthy | (Complain here) 02:17, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
-
- Done -removed the tag over the weekend. This is WAS a current event but will not be updated frequently as the resolution has passed at the Security Council already.
- Oppose Lead is too short, section titles are too long, prose needs work (one example:"Iran says also it doesn't appreciate to be lectured to and pressured by the West and its allies, since they are not doing what they preach to others: namely, getting rid of their own weapons of mass destruction, as it is their legal obligation under the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) to do so, and which they have signed"), and the last sentence of the lead is an awkward self-reference. Quadzilla99 09:18, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
-
- Done-The lead has been expanded, titles have been shortened, finally prose has been worked out.
- Oppose—same issues as mentioned above, plus other issues:
- It's a current event; this is one of the instances where stability can be cited as a true problem.
-
- Please see above for explanation.
-
- Lead needs to be consolidated and expanded.
-
- Done-see above.
-
- Formatting is off; subsections are used where section headers should be used, heading and then a subheading for one paragraph of information, etc.
-
- Done.
-
- References look good, but again, prose needs work (contractions should be removed, repetitive phrasing, and cites should be outside punctuation).
-
- Done.
- Sorry for this rather hasty review, but I'm on low battery :) If I have time, I'll be back with more. But please make these fixes whenever you have the time. — Deckiller 14:30, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
- Speedy withdraw recommended. Prose is a shocker; here's a bit from the lead.
"... wich will be commissioned by the end 2007).[1] Iran did not follow up on this offer, mainly it says, because it was not attractive enough for him to do so. Also, it refers to previous agreements concluded by the West regarding similar objects, with the late Shah of Iran regarding Eurodif and Bushehr or with other countries like with North Korea or Libya, where agreements reached and promises made have not been kept." Tony 08:56, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
-
- Done-see above for the details.
Support. All changes have been made as per your requests, gentlemen. This is our contribution to world peace given that this issue will become a matter of war and peace in the coming months. I think Wikipedia should support our endeavor.SSZ 20:56, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
- Snowball Object. Poor article organization reflected in TOC and numerous one- and two-sentence sections. Prose is very far from compelling; sample prose — Furthermore, the programme is 18 years old, part of it was outside of the IAEA preview. This, by itself, has added to the worries of the IAEA and the international community. Iran says it has already allowed IAEA inspectors to access all its nuclear sites, more than any other country and voluntarily. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:56, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
-
- Done. As said before, I think this article is NOW stable and should not change in the future. Simply because the resolution has passed. Please add your final touch if needed. Best, 69.116.234.208 21:05, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
- Oppose. "Iran did not accept this offer because it was not attractive"; seems a little POVish. Prose is of poor quality throughout the article - I recommend a thorough copyedit. CloudNine 16:25, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.
The article was not promoted 04:22, 5 May 2007.
[edit] South Sydney Rabbitohs
A concise, accurate, comprehensive and well-written article that is thoroughly referenced and which I believe meets FA requirements. Sattlersjaw 00:30, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
- Oppose The logos lack Fair Use Rationales, and the second logo looks like it was sketched on paint. Also many words are linked multiple times (Eric Simms for example is linked five times, three of them in the same section), the rivalries section is very short and the statistics section is nothing but lots of one line paragraphs full of numbers without providing any context for them, and the line "The Rabbitohs have won the most first grade premierships, 20 in all. They have also won the most reserve grade premierships, again 20." feels quite oddly written. Laïka 07:09, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
-
- Done, Have added Fair Use rationale to both logos. Have removed multiple player and club links to their respective Wiki pages from the body of the article. Have rearranged and slightly revised the Statistics and Records section to put some context behind the club and individual player achievements shown. Have revised the abovementioned sentences in relation to first and reserve grade premierships so as not to make their reading feel "odd". Sattlersjaw 11:37, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
- Reply. Will also look at expanding rivalries section. Sattlersjaw 11:37, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
- Done, Rivalries section has been expanded.
- Object. The fair use rationale on Image:South Sydney Rabbitohs logo.jpg is not sufficient and is not article specific. Also, please remove it from your user page, as images claimed under fair use are for the article space only. I do not understand why Image:Minties jersey.jpg is historically significant, and am not convinced it qualifies for fair use in this article. Pagrashtak 16:33, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
-
- Reply. (1) Done The fair use rationale (now updated and expanded) is at the very least the same (if not more comprehensive) as for the logos in articles for other NRL clubs including that of the Sydney Roosters (which is a featured article) and the Brisbane Broncos (which is a candidate for featured article status). (2) Done I would have thought that the logo would be specific and relevant to articles on the South Sydney Rabbitohs club and related articles on its history, its team/players and its honours and achievements. However, I have removed it from the other related club articles and left it only on the main club article page (South Sydney Rabbitohs) for the purpose of meeting fair use rationale. (3) Done Logo removed from user page as requested. (4) The so-called "minities" jersey is historically significant as it depicts past jersey designs and colour schemes which are symbolic with the club. The image is fair use as it is only used to depict the club's past jersey design and is restricted to this article. Sattlersjaw 00:24, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
- The fair use tag on Image:Minties jersey.jpg says that it is being used "to illustrate the event in question". However, you have said above that you are only using it to show the old jersey, not the event. Are you asserting that no public domain or freely licensed pictures of the past jersey exist, and it is impossible for any to be created? Pagrashtak 05:17, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
- OK, point taken. I'm not sure if there are any public domain or freely licensed pictures of the past jersey around - will need some research to determine. In the meantime, I will remove the image from the article page. Done Sattlersjaw 05:28, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
- OK, point taken. I'm not sure if there are any public domain or freely licensed pictures of the past jersey around - will need some research to determine. In the meantime, I will remove the image from the article page.
- The fair use tag on Image:Minties jersey.jpg says that it is being used "to illustrate the event in question". However, you have said above that you are only using it to show the old jersey, not the event. Are you asserting that no public domain or freely licensed pictures of the past jersey exist, and it is impossible for any to be created? Pagrashtak 05:17, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
- Reply. (1)
- Support. On a par with the currently Featured Sydney Roosters article. Good to see someone got the Ian Heads book, the ISBN would be nice to stick in...cheers, Cas Liber | talk | contribs 11:46, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
- ISBN now added.
- Oppose. Footnotes need a lot of work; see WP:CITE/ES. Footnotes should use a consistent format; all sources should include publisher, author and publication date when one is available, and a last access date for all websources. Ditto for References, which should also be alphabetical. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:47, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.
The article was not promoted 04:22, 5 May 2007.
[edit] Dante (Devil May Cry)
We at the Devil May Cry Task Force tried to shape this article after Link's Featured Article version (see here), the page was upgraded to Good Article and then it underwent a Peer review by WikiProject Video games. Like Devil May Cry and Devil May Cry 3 before it, all points presented in this page will be attended ASAP by me or any other member of the Devil May Cry Task Force, thanks for your time. -凶 23:05, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
- Comment Lead seems a bit small. --Lenin and McCarthy | (Complain here) 23:49, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
-
- Just finished expanding it a little. --凶 00:01, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
-
-
- Great article. Can't find much wrong. Quatreryukami 15:44, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
-
- Comment You should make the fair use rationales a little more specific. Right now they say identify the subject of the article. It shouldn't be too hard to add a line so that non-experts can identify the importance of the images rather than just having to take your word for it. Also, {{cite web}} does not automatically format the "date" field like it does with the "accessdate" field. You should add wikilinks to those dates so the user-preference formatting works. Jay32183 19:55, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
-
- Can you please provide an example of what you are suggesting? All dates have been wikilinked. -凶 21:38, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
- Image:Children of the Gods 1.jpg explains specifically why that image used rather than just saying an image could be used. Jay32183 23:19, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
- Also, there is an external jump in the middle of the text, and one of the refs is blank. Jay32183 23:25, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
- Image:Children of the Gods 1.jpg explains specifically why that image used rather than just saying an image could be used. Jay32183 23:19, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
- Can you please provide an example of what you are suggesting? All dates have been wikilinked. -凶 21:38, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
- Weak oppose. I know me showing up and telling you guys what to do must be getting old, so I'll try to make this as brief as possible:
-
- The lead violates a few WP:LEAD guidelines, including content and number of paragraphs. I would suggest cutting down on the mentions of his appearances in other works; perhaps condense the sentences into something like "He is also present in several Devil May Cry novels and manga volumes, and an upcoming anime." These should also be referenced. As for paragraphs, I think the current section could be split into two, with "The character is a mercenary..." starting the second. Per WP:LEAD, some mention of his creation, characteristics and cultural impact should be added to the lead.
Done
- The lead violates a few WP:LEAD guidelines, including content and number of paragraphs. I would suggest cutting down on the mentions of his appearances in other works; perhaps condense the sentences into something like "He is also present in several Devil May Cry novels and manga volumes, and an upcoming anime." These should also be referenced. As for paragraphs, I think the current section could be split into two, with "The character is a mercenary..." starting the second. Per WP:LEAD, some mention of his creation, characteristics and cultural impact should be added to the lead.
-
- Reference #42 is broken. In addition, it links me to a blog site, which I do not believe ranks as a reliable source. I suggest removing this reference and either replacing it, or leaving ScrewAttack to cover that part. You could probably find something more about his reception through reviews, if "best characters" lists lack the information.Done
- Reference #42 is broken. In addition, it links me to a blog site, which I do not believe ranks as a reliable source. I suggest removing this reference and either replacing it, or leaving ScrewAttack to cover that part. You could probably find something more about his reception through reviews, if "best characters" lists lack the information.
-
- Per Link (The Legend of Zelda), perhaps some mention of the Devil May Cry series' sales figures could be added to the lead?Done
- Per Link (The Legend of Zelda), perhaps some mention of the Devil May Cry series' sales figures could be added to the lead?
-
- Finally, the article needs a copyedit, to bring it up to the FA prose standard of "compelling, even brilliant". This should also take care of the article's few violations of WP:WAF.
- If these are taken care of, the article will have my support. JimmyBlackwing 09:29, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
-
- Most of the points have been attended, I will deal with the copy edit soon. -凶 19:21, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
- Oppose Here's a couple of things that could be fixed:
- The See Also section is not supposed to link to things already linked to in the article
- Try to find some way to title the sections without repeating part of the article title in them, see WP:MSH, although this might be hard.
- Why is Devil May Cry in italics only half the time.
- What years does this series cover? I'm a not a videogame player, some background would be nice like "Since 1999, Capcom has produced four games..."
- Ths whole section of prose needs a little work:"The first, entitled Devil May Cry on its cover and "Devil May Cry Volume 1" inside, was published in Japan in conjunction with the release of the first game, and depicts Dante in an adventure set before the events of the first game. The second novel (entitled Devil May Cry 2 in the U.S.) was published in Japan to coincide with the release of the second game, and takes place after the events of Devil May Cry (Video Game)." Why is the phrase video game in parentheses there? Why is the phrase Video game even there at all? Also, saying "first game" twice that close together should probably be avoided.
- This sentence needs a little work too, the second half in particular:"Taking place about a year before the events of Devil May Cry 3, the manga tells the story of how the characters came to where they were at the start of the game." Not very brilliant prose.
- "In the case of Dante, he first learns that his brother Vergil is alive since the time their mother was killed by demons." Poorly worded. You mean his brother is still alive, and Dante discovers this foir the first time since their mother was killed I assume. This sentence comes close to saying his brother was dead until their mother died and has been alive since.
- "The character and Devil May Cry are one of Capcom's flagship game franchises, a franchise which has sold over five million copies worldwide to date (2007)." As of 2007 would be better as it avoids parentheses.
- "The character is also present in several Devil May Cry novels and manga volumes, also being featured in an upcoming anime." This needs work "and will be featured" would be better.
-
-
- There's more prose issues throughout, it needs some copy-editing. Quadzilla99 06:57, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
-
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.
The article was not promoted 04:22, 5 May 2007.
[edit] BackupHDDVD
Self-nomination Currently GA. Covers the subject exhaustively if not completely, for that reason I think the unusually short length can be excused. Has plenty of references and has been stable for a while now. Noclip 04:12, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
Opposefor several reasons:- I personally don't believe the prose is very fluid or captivating. The FA admin can take this as they will, it's just my personal opinion after reading through the article.
- Can you clarify this? Examples?
- Some hail it as a victory for consumers' fair use rights, while others are expressing concerns
- I personally don't believe the prose is very fluid or captivating. The FA admin can take this as they will, it's just my personal opinion after reading through the article.
that it will be used for piracy. This is an example of...er...I can't really remember the term, but you claim that some people do something while others do something else without really providing any sources.
-
-
- Done
- The referencing doesn't make very much sense to me. Almost half of all notes are references to some website's forum, one is a broken link [19] [20], and none of them follow the proper formatting for citation.
- The YouTube reference is meant to demonstrate that it was taken down.
- The section heading "AACS cracked?" seems like the title of an opinion editorial.
- Done
- When the release of the tool was publicized, several articles incorrectly claimed that AACS had been "cracked." Which articles? This is just another example of a number of claims made in this articles that are not backed up.
- Done Examples added.
- This link will not always report the article in its "latest news" section.
- Looking for a mirror, but archive.org seems to be lagging a year behind.
- So my best suggestion to you would be to consult other FAs and try to bring it up to the standard of those while finding more reputable sources to back up the stuff that's written in the article. Then take what you've written and subject it to a heavy copyedit to get things flowing correctly. Then get over to peer review and see what they can do to help. Hope this helps, JHMM13 06:43, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
-
- Thanks for responding to my suggestions. I'm sorry about linking the YouTube link. As you can see by the wording, I only meant to include one after remembering that the link references something within the article. I would like to continue working with you to help improve this article, but I'm afraid I don't have time to do it at the moment. For this reason I don't think it is fair for me to oppose this article because I can't match the effort you put into it and I'm changing my input to neutral. Thanks again and I appreciate the hard work you've put into the article. JHMM13 05:56, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
-
-
Oppose
- "free, open source utility" may not necessarily be released as public domain. Could you check on the licence?
- The SourceForge page (before it was removed) listed it as PD.
- presumably for the purpose -- presumably?
- Presumed by the author. It could be used in a wide variety of ways, but the use it was created for was backup.
- Too many short paragraphs. Could be merged into a larger section
- Done
- There's just one line to its working. This needs to be expanded.
- Done
=Nichalp «Talk»= 07:16, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
Some of my points are still not fixed. Here are some more comments.
- Licence is still PD in the infobox
-
- For the second time the official project on SourceForge listed it as public domain. What do you suggest the license be changed to?
- initial version external link is bad style. Use Wikipedia:Footnote3 to avoid mixing with references.
-
- Done It was a duplicate also, removed
- =Background= --> =Working=
-
- This has less to do with the criteria than your personal preference.
- Size of the program?
-
- Done
- January 24th --> wikify as January 24
-
- Done
- presumably is too vague to be used here.
-
- Done Reworded
=Nichalp «Talk»= 04:41, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
- Support I like it! It's a pleasure to read and very informative. While not PERFECT, certainly better than other artcles that have recieved FA status. Sue Rangell[citation needed] 02:41, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
- Sue, you really need to familiarise yourself with the Featured article criteria. Featured Articles ought to be damn near perfect. Maybe if you've seen others which aren't, they were old FAs needing review (WP:FAR) or had been vandalised. Either way, or whatever the reason, please focus on the article in question and how/whether it meets the criteria. --kingboyk 22:28, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
- The last statement of the previous reviewer appears to be irrelevant to the criteria. Oppose because the prose is awkward and faulty throughout. Here are just a few examples.
- "does not violate the Digital Millenium Copyright Act nor ..." No, "neither ... nor", otherwise don't use "nor".
- "to successfully decrypt a disc's contents" - ungainly on a number of counts.
- "a task with which neither BackupHDDVD nor its author provide any assistance" - "With"?
- This is a perfectly valid way of expressing "a task which neither BackupHDDVD nor its author provide any assistance with."
- "For several weeks after the utility's release no claims of having been able to successfully use the author's key extraction technique were made" - Avoid possessive apostrophe for unconscious items. Comma almost compulsory after "release". It's another ungainly sentence.
- "However, in mid-January, a key was published and several others quickly discovered a method" - Several other what? Tony 08:38, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
- Done Addressed general concern of awkward prose, fixed specific examples. Noclip 18:51, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
- Neutral. A bit short, no free images, too technical – Gurch 21:59, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
- Further to my object, if you have indeed "addressed general concern of awkward prose" as you claim, why is it easy to find at random problems throughout the article? Here are exampels.
- "BackupHDDVD is a small open source utility available in both command line and GUI-based versions which aids in the decryption of AACS copy-protected commercial HD DVD discs, intended to be used for backing up a film the user has purchased." It's not a small and open source utility, so you must use a hyphen ("open-source"), whether in AmEng, BrEng or AusEng. It would be kinder to our readers to split such a long, complicated sentence as an entree to the topic. I'd be turned off, myself.
- Done
- It's not a deal-breaker, but next time go easy on "which".
- "This video has since been removed at the request of Warner Brothers Entertainment, citing copyrighted material being used without permission." The "citing ..." clause is unclear, although I guess we can work out the intended meaning. Better as the more direct ", on the basis that it breaches copyright", don't you think?
- Done
- "as to how keys necessary for a successful decryption "—I think (am I right?) that "as to how the keys that were necessary ..." is clearer.
- Done
- The hated "in order to" is still in evidence. Tell me, why not remove the two redundant words? What's the attraction of this hedghog phrase? ("held in memory, to facilitate playback").
- Done
- "could be used to obtain title keys"—"THE title keys"; let's stampt out this telegram language that scientists and technical people are increasingly falling prey to.
- This has nothing to do with "telegram language." Adding "the" here would be inappropriate as there is a unique set of title keys for each disc. Noclip 14:15, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
- Stubby paragraphs. Tony 12:33, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
- "BackupHDDVD is a small open source utility available in both command line and GUI-based versions which aids in the decryption of AACS copy-protected commercial HD DVD discs, intended to be used for backing up a film the user has purchased." It's not a small and open source utility, so you must use a hyphen ("open-source"), whether in AmEng, BrEng or AusEng. It would be kinder to our readers to split such a long, complicated sentence as an entree to the topic. I'd be turned off, myself.
- The stubs remain; the "History" section is inadequate; insufficient attempt to improve the prose aside from fixing the specific instances I've raised above. "In mid-January of 2007"—Why is "2007" linked? Have a look at the year page; it's so relevant. Tony 00:24, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
- Perhaps you should take a look at how far the article has come from the GA version, or even the original nominated version before claiming that only specific issues have been addressed. Noclip 16:08, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
- If the program runs in command line and is released into the public domain, could we get a free image of it running in command line as opposed to a non-free image of it running in the Windows XP GUI? --Iamunknown 08:17, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
- Possibly, but such a screenshot would most likely include AACS keys (which are copyrighted). Noclip 16:43, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
- I apologise, I'm unfamiliar with the acronym AACS. What does it refer to? --Iamunknown 19:39, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
- Advanced Access Content System, it's a form of digital rights management. Noclip 22:13, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
- It seems like an image that did not have the AACS codes could still be created, depending upon what information would display at boot up or at the entry of
/helpor other parameters. Would you make such an image? --Iamunknown 03:28, 28 April 2007 (UTC)- Done Noclip 04:31, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
- Cool, I'd recommend using it and not the other image, then the article is all free. --Iamunknown 04:50, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
- At first I was considering it but felt that the GUI image illustrated the subject of the article well enough to warrant its keeping. I've removed it for now. Noclip 04:56, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
- Okay. I also have two textual suggestions after a cursory glance:
- In the lead bypass the disambiguation page for the link "handle" by linking to User (computing) (but keep the displayed text as "handle").
- Could a source be found for the sentence "According to creator of BackupHDDVD, he first set out to circumvent AACS (...) unless an HDCP compliant chain of video hardware was present."?
- I'll try to look later, but what I'm mostly interested with (image and copyright issues) is, currently, resolved. --Iamunknown 05:03, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
- Okay. I also have two textual suggestions after a cursory glance:
- At first I was considering it but felt that the GUI image illustrated the subject of the article well enough to warrant its keeping. I've removed it for now. Noclip 04:56, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
- Cool, I'd recommend using it and not the other image, then the article is all free. --Iamunknown 04:50, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
- I apologise, I'm unfamiliar with the acronym AACS. What does it refer to? --Iamunknown 19:39, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
- Possibly, but such a screenshot would most likely include AACS keys (which are copyrighted). Noclip 16:43, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
- Comment.
-
- these keys are easily be revoked by AACS LA - needs correcting, I'm not sure what it's meant to say.
- to each licensed device manufacturer - are these manufacturers of licensed devices, or device manufacturers who are licensed? Needs a hyphen to clarify.
- Are you sure Muslix64 is male?
- Any references for the "Limitations" section? Arguably a limitation... - who argued it?
- Sources need a bit of work; some are lacking publisher or author information.
- I agree that it is a little daunting to someone unfamiliar with the topic, due to the technical nature and large number of abbreviations. I'm not sure how much of that can be avoided though, due to to the subject matter of the article. Trebor 12:59, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
- Done Noclip 15:09, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
- Oppose. Some of the text, such as fifth paragraph of the "History" section, is uncited. An inline citation at the end of every paragraph will correct this. Cla68 02:22, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
- Done? That's funny, because the History section still comprises stubby paragraphs. Devoting a whole section to "Future" is questionable, given WP's policy on that. And it's one sentence alone? Remove the last word as redundant. I find this article lacking comprehensiveness (for example, "Features and limitations" comprises two stubs—isn't there any more to say on such a complex tool?). It's thin, the pic at the top is pretty boring, and overall I think it fails to represent WP's best work, as required. The writing is subprofessional (I can easily pick out embarrassments such as "and is purported to run faster that its Java counterparts"—"purport" is the wrong word; look it up. I can't see this on the main page, frankly. Tony 00:19, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
- The contents of "Future" has been moved into "History." As for the "features and limitations" section, I wasn't aware of your intimate knowledge of this application giving you the ability to judge the amount of prose needed to properly describe its complexity. In fact, it takes a key and passes it to a ready made AES library, then dumps the result to a location specified by the user, there's not that much to it. I am working on fixing some of the "embarrassments." Noclip 03:16, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
- Oppose:
- "The software, written by an anonymous programmer using the handle Muslix64, is distributed in a manner which the author feels neither violates the Digital Millenium Copyright Act nor infringes on any copyrights." How do we know what the author feels, if he or she is anonymous?
- Because the author's post about the utility says that?
- "Users wanting to use the software to decrypt a protected disc's contents would need to have obtained either a disc's volume or title key separately, a task which BackupHDDVD's author provides no assistance with." Of course the author doesn't provide any assistance, only the program would.
- The author could have provided assistance by way of e-mail or private message, or included keys with the program but didn't. The program doesn't provide any assistance either.
- "According to the creator of BackupHDDVD, (s)he first set out to circumvent AACS to bypass a restriction in software HD DVD players [...]" Could we use "he or she" or "she or he" instead of "(s)he"?
- Sure, I just didn't want to use "she or he" twice in one paragraph.
- "Several unofficial versions of BackupHDDVD have been released, including ones with a GUI and the ability to locate keys on the internet or scan for them in memory automatically." What does "official" mean in this context? Does that only mean that it hails from the author of the original version? If so, why not write that?
- Clarified
- Footnotes 6, 12 18 do not cite Reliable sources. 6: The fact that youtube has taken down a video, which was once at that address doesn't prove anything. Besides, if no sources mention this, we may have to ask whether the fact is relevant at all. 12 and 16: blogs and internet forums are not reliable sources
- YouTube certainly isn't a reliable source and that reference can be removed, but the "unreliable" forum post happens to be made by an individual who understands AACS about as intimately as AACS LA itself, so you might want to let that one slide.
- The "Future" and "See also" sections should be removed. The former could easily be integrated into some other section. As to the latter: if a term ain't worth mentioning in the article, then it ain't worth being linked, besides some of those are mentioned in the article, so why not links them from there?
- Done
- I agree with the statements from the previous reviewers: this article needs serious copyediting. It is especially needs to use less technical jargon in order to be able to be understood by more people, especially the "background" section.--Carabinieri 02:26, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
- The makers of AACS relied a lot on security through obscurity so a less technical "Background" section would in all likelyhood be next to impossible. Noclip 03:16, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.
The article was not promoted 04:22, 5 May 2007.
[edit] Brisbane Broncos
I think this page is a worthwhile candidate for FA... It is a good article with referencing etc. SpecialWindler 04:51, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
- Comment there's a few Peacock terms in there ("an amazing turnaround"), and some of the sentences don't quite gel ("This is perhaps due to the many players who represent theQueensland Maroons in the State of Origin series, this extra workload may cause a loss of form to the club." doesn't quite make sense), but overall, it's not a bad article. Laïka 06:37, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
- Done, fixed those examples mentioned. SpecialWindler 07:59, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
- In addition, your images need Fair Use Rationales. Laïka 08:38, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
- Done Hopefully, I might be wrong, but i tried?? SpecialWindler 06:38, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
- I've replaced the "colours" image with {{football kit}}, to show better the kit of the team, but feel free to revert if it is not as good as the previous image. Laïka 10:58, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
- I removed those they don't go with the article, it looks dodge (good work though), i removed the other colour thingo too. SpecialWindler 06:38, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
- In addition, your images need Fair Use Rationales. Laïka 08:38, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
- Oppose What there is looks good. However there is not nearly enough info. Stadium section is too short, nothing about Supporters or Rivals. Records section should be more than just a list. Needs a list of there Honours. Buc 10:19, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
- Done I have changed the records section, there was alreagy a honours section. Stadium partially longed, the info is on the subsequent pages (main pages), I don't think there is enough information on Supporters and Rivalries to add sections. SpecialWindler 12:30, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
- As I've already said on the Broncos' talk page, I really don't think the broncos have a greater rivalry with one club than another. I'm against the inclusion of this section. It would be misleading to people unfamiliar with the broncos and puzzling to people who are. I know it was suggested by an editor in this FA review, but I doubt that that person is familiar with the subject matter. Creating a major rivalries section just for the sake of having one is wrong.--Jeff79 06:30, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
- Oppose—1a and formatting. Prose needs work throughout, and there are several formatting/stubby paragraph issues. Here are random examples from the top:
-
- Doing... As you say below, being familiar with the article you miss little things like this. I'll be looking for more than your examples and thankyou. SpecialWindler 03:13, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
- "The Broncos played a significant role in the following Super League War before continuing to compete successfully in the National Rugby League competition of today." Is "of today" necessary? Second time NRL is linked; usually, items need only be linked once.
- Done SpecialWindler 03:01, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
- The four stubby paras in the lead should be consolidated into two or three.
- Done SpecialWindler 03:01, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
- "Queensland’s success in the 1980s State of Origin in addition to the inclusion of a Brisbane team in the mid-week competition convinced the New South Wales Rugby League to invite a Queensland-based team into the competition." Needs commas before "in addition" and "convinced".
- Done SpecialWindler 03:13, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
- "The Broncos secured the services of Wayne Bennett, who remains the clubs coach 20 years later." "Clubs" should be "club's". "remains the club's coach 20 years later" can be reworded to "who is still the club's coach" for succinctness.
- Done SpecialWindler 03:13, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
- Spacing issue between the [2] ref and the next sentence. I also see similar spacing issues throughout the text.
- Doing... alot of this is very confusing. SpecialWindler 03:13, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
- Please avoid repetitive "the broncos" wording. Try "the team" and "the side" for variety.
- Doing... SpecialWindler 03:13, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
- I recommend moving the season by season records chart to below the prose sections, making the history section into one section without subheadings. It'll help the flow of the table of contents and the prose.
- Done SpecialWindler 03:01, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
- One sentence para in the middle of the history section. Try to compress that into one of the other paras nearby.
- Done SpecialWindler 03:01, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
- "But in 2006, the Broncos' luck changed." Sentence needs rewording. Try "However, the Broncos improved in the 2006 season." As a matter of fact, the entire section could use an audit for words like "luck" and similar analysis of the team's successes or problems; they are not usually the best words to include. Speaking of which, I believe "faired" should be "fared".
- Doing... SpecialWindler 03:13, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
- These are signs that the prose needs auditing to conform to the "professional standard" required of featured articles. Try the League of Copyeditors; the article needs editors unfamiliar with the text to spot other similar errors. On the whole, however, it's an excellent article; it just needs more tweaking to conform to FA standards. — Deckiller 02:33, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
-
- Comment. The lead uses one of three paragraphs on Broncos being the only team listed on the ASX, along with details on who owns the most stocks and how many. But I can't find any more about this further down. I sort of expected to find a section about the coorperate/financial side in the article, or at least more details on things like when it was first listed, a bit on the history behind it and also some information on how the club is doing financially (is it profitable, how has the stock been doing after it went public, etc). I've seen many FA's mentioning interesting things in the lead for never to talk about them again, so I guess it's not a reason to oppose a FAC. So I'm not opposing, just suggesting what might be added to make the article more complete. When a team is publicly listed on a major stock exchange, it's more than a sports team, it's also big business. And I suggest writing a (small, even) section on that side of the Brisbane Broncos would be worthwhile. Shanes 04:29, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
- Reply. You see, there is not much information on that aspect of the Broncos after all they are the only rugby league club in Australia on the stock market. However your right, that part should be backed up down in the article, but it might be better served if those two sentences are put in the History section??, I think its better up the top but ... We'll see. SpecialWindler 05:54, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
- Comment. As part of WP:RL I'd love to see this article get promoted, but there are a lot of things I'd like added and changed before it gets to that stage.
At the moment there are a number of things I'm unhappy with, including that season summary table - surely trivia like that shouldn't be featured on this main page like that.I can also tell you that there is going to be stiff opposition for this article being promoted based on just 12 references and given how short the article is compared to similar articles (see Sydney Roosters and South Sydney Rabbitohs).The history section is just one screen in length, and the article could do with a "Support" section given Brisbane's unusually large fanbase.Rather than simply making criticisms I'm happy to help out fix the article up, which I will do. --mdmanser 03:54, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
- Reply Thanks for your support, the references are adequate if you check the 12 references they are used numerous times each. Also The Broncos have only been around for 20 years not 100. SpecialWindler 07:14, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
- I've done a quick sweep of the non-history sections including some more wikilinking, addition of material and maintaining a consistent prose throughout most of the article. However, an independent copyeditor will need to help out on the article from here on to improve prose even further in my opinion. Upon reflection of my previous comments, I'm now thinking that perhaps a "support" section is not needed (it is integrated into "stadium") but perhaps a rivalry section may need doing if reviewers believe the article requires more length. However, that said, any such section will likely be very short and superfluous given most of the rivalry information is already stated elsewhere in the article. mdmanser 13:33, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
- Comment. The depth of content and sources available for articles on South Sydney Rabbitohs and Sydney Roosters (both 100 years old) is far greater than for a club of this age (the same goes for the other NRL clubs for that matter); those evaluating this article for FA status need to take this into account. My only suggestion to expand the history section would be further reference to the Brisbane Rugby League competition, the migration of Queensland player to the NSWRL and the Combined Brisbane representative side that competed in the Amco Cup. This would put the formation of the club into context. CumberlandsAshes81 12:26, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
- Comment—the prose is definitely better in those two sections, but there is still plenty of work to be done throughout. — Deckiller 17:51, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.
[edit] Cobranet
Self-Nomination: This article has attained GA status and had a peer review. I am essentially the sole contributor to the article. The GA review and peer review didn't turn up any major issues with the article. Let me know if there are any ways to further improve from here. Thanks. Snottywong 12:35, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
- Object and Refer to peer review. The article was listed at peer review on May 4th, and removed on May 7th after one brief comment. Suggest review of WP:MSH as a starting place. The article has external jumps, and is largely uncited. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 12:49, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
- Object - As Sandy said, undercited and does not comply with Wikipedia:Manual of Style (headings). Parts of this article are very listy and should be converted into prose. Non-free images lack sufficient article-specific fair use rationale per Wikipedia:Non-free content. I'm not sure the collapsible tables with lists of external jumps are the way to go. Pagrashtak 14:19, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
![[17]](http://www.phil.pku.edu.cn/personal/wugsh/kxts/pot/028.jpg){kind=link}