Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Birmingham/archive1

This article seems well-written and is a good article so far! --Sunfazer | Talk 13:16, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Object - several sections lack any inline citations at all. —Whouk (talk) 13:26, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Object -- lots of issues including unbalanced sections, unnecessary information (article should be a summary and detail moved to daughter articles), geography is sparse, demographics missing etc. The number of sections can be trimmed by merging with other sections and summarising. =Nichalp «Talk»= 15:29, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Object:
    • More WP:FOOTNOTEs would definitely be helpful. They should be cited in accordance with WP:CITE (see also WP:CITE/ES, {{Cite web}})
    • Please alphabetize the interwiki links (minor issue)
    • The population statistics in the WP:LEAD belong in a Demographics section.
    • Several sections are too short, like Famous residents and Literature. I suggest either merging or expanding them.
    • It is a bit too list-weighty; for example Places of interest and Twinning should be prosified.
    • Image:BlackSabbath.jpg needs a fair use rationale (see WP:FUC). I would suggest replacing it, as replacements should be able to be found.
    • Image:Birm 1977 arms.png will also need a fair use rationale
    • Change The main article is at History of Birmingham; the following is a summary. to {{mainarticle|Birmingham}}
    • Generally, years without full dates aren't linked - see WP:MOSDATE

Thanks, AndyZ t 15:30, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]