Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Murder of Victoria Climbié/archive1
- 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 00:08, 6 March 2008.
I'm nominating this article for featured article because it is detailed, informative and well referenced. SilkTork *What's YOUR point? 15:11, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment I don't know if this is possible, but can you look into adding images to the article? Thanks, Nishkid64 (talk) 04:00, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- There is a well known and well used image. I have asked Mecu for advise. SilkTork *What's YOUR point? 19:14, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Discussion of GA image requirements moved to talk. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 06:16, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- There is a well known and well used image. I have asked Mecu for advise. SilkTork *What's YOUR point? 19:14, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose: this simply isn't ready yet. There are various formatting issues—(2 November 1991 — February 20, 2000), external link in lead, improper use of dashes—and the prose just isn't up to standard. Take for example the entire first sentence, which is clunky and awkward; the article needs to be copy-edited. I also note that it has had less than fifty edits in the last eleven months, and it doesn't look like this article was prepared for this FAC against Featured Article criteria; it's basically straight out of its GA nomination, which sets off warning bells for me. Most of the article's information was added by User:Christopher Connor with a single edit; very impressive, but they don't seem to be very active anymore. Who will address concerns? María (habla conmigo) 13:15, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose - A few things I've initially picked up just in the lead. If this is still going in a few days, I'll try and do a full read through.
- "the creation of a database, ContactPoint, that will hold information on all children in England and Wales" - has it been created or not? You're implying both things...
- Refs 1 and 2 are in serious need of formatting
- "Here they met Manning and moved in with him" - who's Manning?
- If you're going to source stuff in the lead, which it seems you are, than you need to source the 2nd paragraph, especially the quote
- The last sentence of the lead propably fits in with the previous paragraph (and, ironically, says who Manning is for the first time...).
- All this from the lead; probably needs a fair bit more work. Suggest a thorough peer review before you go for FAC again, should this not succeed. dihydrogen monoxide (H20) 10:53, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I clearly didn't understand the nature of the FAC process. I'm sorry to have brought this to your attention. I thought this was a collaborative process - I didn't realise the person nominating was then expected to do all the work. How do I withdraw this? SilkTork *What's YOUR point? 21:02, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.