Wikipedia:Featured article review/Tooth development/archive1

The following is an archived discussion of a featured article review. Please do not modify it. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page or at Wikipedia talk:Featured article review. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was removed by Nikkimaria 02:26, 22 July 2011 [1].

Tooth development

Review commentary

Notified: Medicine WP, Dentistry WP (no user with over 20 edits to the article has been active since 2009)

I am nominating this featured article for review because after a notification of work needed in April, nothing has been done on this article. Here are some of the issues:

Referencing is the largest issue with this article, as can be seen by the multiple citation and clarification needed tags.
Multiple dead links, leading to even more of the article being essentially unreferenced.
What makes ref #66 ("Ovarian teratoma (dermoid) with teeth") a reliable source?
Many web references missing access dates.
Prose needs some major work. For example, just from the Tooth development in animals section: "Teeth is atavic structure" and "Fish have many specialized bony structures,[77] it exist with".
Many, many, many short (one or two sentence) paragraphs, which make the relevant sections very choppy and list-like.
Technicality and over-referencing. For example, from the Molecular biology section, "Enamel knots as a signaling center in the tooth morphogenesis and odontoblast differentiation.[60][61][62][63]" First, what does this mean? It is complete gobbledegook to me. Second, why does it need four references?
Technicality tag on the top of the article (it was on the talk page, so I moved it).

Overall, needs some major work on references, technicality, prose and MOS before it is back up to FA quality. Dana boomer (talk) 15:44, 13 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

FARC commentary

Featured article criteria mentioned as issues in the review section include referencing, prose, MOS compliance and cleanup banners. Dana boomer (talk) 16:49, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delist, agree with the concerns per Dana boomer (talk · contribs) above. No effort has been made since the FAR started. JJ98 (Talk / Contributions) 17:27, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delist - Nothing has been done to this article since I nominated it for FAR. Needs major work (outlined above) before it is back to FA quality. Dana boomer (talk) 13:49, 6 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delist Have to agree that no one has shown effort on this article in order to keep its status. Brad (talk) 01:10, 14 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delist per above, nothing's happened since FAR started. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 23:58, 19 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.