| Revision as of 13:27, 8 February 2007 editDrKay (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators159,713 edits →[]← Previous edit | Revision as of 12:30, 9 February 2007 edit undoDrKay (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators159,713 edits →[]: Nomination withdrawnNext edit → | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| ===]=== | ===]=== | ||
| '''Self-nomination''' A "good article" meeting fac. ] 08:39, 7 February 2007 (UTC) | <s>'''Self-nomination''' A "good article" meeting fac. ] 08:39, 7 February 2007 (UTC)</s> | ||
| *'''Oppose'''. Improper referencing. Not enough inline citations to match claims. Lead section far too short for my taste. Prose not brilliant. Here is an example: "''George was not the first choice of the Greek people'' ('''citation??'''). ''Upon the '''overthrow''' of Otto, the Greek people '''had rejected''' his brother Leopold, the '''heir presumptive''', while adhering to the concept of a monarchy.'' <font style="background:#b22222;">''']''' </font>] 08:56, 7 February 2007 (UTC) | *'''Oppose'''. Improper referencing. Not enough inline citations to match claims. Lead section far too short for my taste. Prose not brilliant. Here is an example: "''George was not the first choice of the Greek people'' ('''citation??'''). ''Upon the '''overthrow''' of Otto, the Greek people '''had rejected''' his brother Leopold, the '''heir presumptive''', while adhering to the concept of a monarchy.'' <font style="background:#b22222;">''']''' </font>] 08:56, 7 February 2007 (UTC) | ||
| **Three references are given for the above - Van der Kiste, Clogg and Forster - all at the end of the paragraph. ] 09:17, 7 February 2007 (UTC) | **Three references are given for the above - Van der Kiste, Clogg and Forster - all at the end of the paragraph. ] 09:17, 7 February 2007 (UTC) | ||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
| '''Oppose'''. I thing this artcle can't be Featured article.--] 12:59, 8 February 2007 (UTC) | '''Oppose'''. I thing this artcle can't be Featured article.--] 12:59, 8 February 2007 (UTC) | ||
| *That isn't particularly helpful or constructive. Please be more specific in your criticism. ] 13:27, 8 February 2007 (UTC) | *That isn't particularly helpful or constructive. Please be more specific in your criticism. ] 13:27, 8 February 2007 (UTC) | ||
| I'm sorry but after some thought I've decided not to continue with this proposal. I just don't understand how an article like ] can be the Main Page Featured Article in April when it has no citations, and includes comments like "...every time he had intimate relations with a woman he would cut a lock of her hair and place it in an envelope with her name on it. At the time of his death there were allegedly 7,000 such envelopes." Whilst at the same time you oppose FA status for my article because of "Improper referencing" even though it contains no contested comments and is fully referenced.<br> | |||
| (1) As I am not able to understand your criticisms, I consequently cannot address them.<br> | |||
| (2) I think my limited time would be better spent improving what I consider a bad article like George IV, rather than improving an already good article like George I into a fantastic one.<br> | |||
| Please close the discussion and accept my apologies for wasting your time. I would prefer not to enter into correspondence on this matter. ] 12:30, 9 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 12:30, 9 February 2007
George I of Greece
Self-nomination A "good article" meeting fac. DrKiernan 08:39, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
- Oppose. Improper referencing. Not enough inline citations to match claims. Lead section far too short for my taste. Prose not brilliant. Here is an example: "George was not the first choice of the Greek people (citation??). Upon the overthrow of Otto, the Greek people had rejected his brother Leopold, the heir presumptive, while adhering to the concept of a monarchy. JHMM13
08:56, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
- Three references are given for the above - Van der Kiste, Clogg and Forster - all at the end of the paragraph. DrKiernan 09:17, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
Weak Oppose and Conditional Support. I agree with JHMM13 that the article needs a larger lead and more citations as some sections do not have any. I also think that the article needs a seperate references section. If my concerns are adressed I would be more than happy to support the article. Kyriakos 06:33, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
- I have expanded the lead and separated the note from the references. The unreferenced comments are ones which occur in more than one source. I shall select representative references and insert them gradually. DrKiernan 13:27, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
Oppose. I thing this artcle can't be Featured article.--Absar 12:59, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
- That isn't particularly helpful or constructive. Please be more specific in your criticism. DrKiernan 13:27, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
I'm sorry but after some thought I've decided not to continue with this proposal. I just don't understand how an article like George IV of the United Kingdom can be the Main Page Featured Article in April when it has no citations, and includes comments like "...every time he had intimate relations with a woman he would cut a lock of her hair and place it in an envelope with her name on it. At the time of his death there were allegedly 7,000 such envelopes." Whilst at the same time you oppose FA status for my article because of "Improper referencing" even though it contains no contested comments and is fully referenced.
(1) As I am not able to understand your criticisms, I consequently cannot address them.
(2) I think my limited time would be better spent improving what I consider a bad article like George IV, rather than improving an already good article like George I into a fantastic one.
Please close the discussion and accept my apologies for wasting your time. I would prefer not to enter into correspondence on this matter. DrKiernan 12:30, 9 February 2007 (UTC)