Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 09:01, 24 January 2004

This page works similar to Misplaced Pages:Votes for deletion, only the other way around: If a page is listed here for at least a week with no objections, it can be added to Misplaced Pages:Featured articles. If there are objections, they have to be worked out, until a nearly unanimous consensus is reached. However, if the article with objections remains listed here for more than a month, the nomination will be archived in Misplaced Pages:Feature candidates/Archived nominations.

If you nominate a page to which you have contributed all or a large majority of content, then it must be seconded by at least one more person in order to be accepted. Some people may object to self-nominations on principle.

If you are trying to decide whether to nominate or second an article for featuring, it is worth reading Misplaced Pages:The perfect article to see how high the bar can be set.

Also, be sure to sign (with date/time) your nomination ("~~~~" in the editor). If a nomination, comment, or objection is not signed it might be ignored.

After nominating an article, you may want to place a notice on it to alert readers:

''This article has been nominated on ]. Please refer to that page if you wish to second or contest the nomination.''

If an article's nomination is accepted, this statement should be removed and a notice placed at the top of the talk page:

''This is a ].''

See also:

• Log of recently added articles
• Archived nominations not added due to objections

Recently added to Featured articles after going through due process here

• Geyser -- Partly self-nomiated by: mav 01:00, 1 Sep 2003 (UTC)
  • I like this too but sadly can't be an official seconder ... the few photos mav didn't take I did! Pete 13:03, 9 Sep 2003 (EDT)
  • Looks good. How about some more links and a bibliography?—Eloquence 06:55, Oct 9, 2003 (UTC)
  • I've added additional links and a small bibliography in need of expansion by someone actually familiar with this subject. :-) The rest of the article I found comprehensive, informative, and perspicuous—entirely deserving of being called Brilliant Prose. Second. Chris Roy 08:36, 23 Dec 2003 (UTC)
  • Added 20 Jan 04

• Vacuous truth - an entry speaking of a mathematical subject, that I actually learned something from, and was entertained by readin. -- Smerdis of Tlön 01:14, 23 Dec 2003 (UTC)
  • Seconded. Clear and entertaining. moink 20:20, 26 Dec 2003 (UTC)
  • The article is generally fine-to-excellent, but the section dealing with the following sentence needs attention:

If Peter wins the lottery tomorrow, then he will buy a new house.

The treatment assumes that this "natural language" statement must be treated as a formal statement in conventional two-valued logic. There are other (perhaps more plausible) treatments. Suppose, for example, that Peter did not win the lottery on the specified day, but that Peter was in fact dead at the time the utterance was made. Must we say that, in retrospect, the statement was true at the time the utterance was made simply because Peter did not win the lottery? We might say it was false because there is an implicit (and false) claim that Peter was alive at the time the utterance was made; or we might say that for this kind of "if/then" statement about the future to be true at the time it is proposed, there must be some possibility that the consequent will be true. In brief, let's not encourage confusion between meaning and symbolic logic. Peak 09:20, 9 Jan 2004 (UTC)

• Concept album - very well written, including the history. Amazingly long/complete list of albums. --Raul654 17:43, 22 Dec 2003
  • Object. The list of albums is nice, but the definition "concept album" is hazy, and the related history is far from complete. Why did the "concept album" emerge? Are there early proto-concept examples? When and where did the conventions of the "non-concept" album come from?, etc. Difficult to know why any given album would or would not qualify for this category. Would Frank Sinatra's "Songs for Swingin' Lovers" count? How can I judge? BT 02:06, 6 Jan 2004 (UTC)

• Mandarin (linguistics) well-written and extensive. --Jiang 12:00, 22 Dec 2003 (UTC)

• Mitochondrial Eve. "I not only tremendously enjoyed reading this article, but have since discussed what I learned here with family and friends. Well done Jack" (posted 05:09, 7 Jan 2004 (UTC) in seconding a self-nomination)
  • Seconded. Very good article. Gentgeen 06:46, 9 Jan 2004 (UTC)

• • Adam Clayton Powell, Jr. I'm not knowledgeable enough to judge the content critically. Certainly reads as a solid, well-written, "encyclopedic" article with good, even coverage of the topic, a good photograph, etc. Dpbsmith 14:39, 5 Jan 2004 (UTC)

• Indus Valley Civilization An outstanding example of multiple authors evolving a well-written, polished and professional entry. Wetman 02:53, 9 Jan 2004 (UTC)

• The Palm Sunday Tornado Outbreak - Interesting, even thrilling, article about an important but not necessarily well-remembered event. 12.46.6.33 21:35, 13 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Recently removed articles, and reason for removal

• History of the United States -- This article is in the process of being rewritten (or so it seems to me). There are many sections with headings like For details, see the main History of the United States (1964-present) article without any text under that heading. Removed by: DanKeshet

• American Pie (song) - Was added to BP by User:RickK without going through due process, according to Pete 11:03, 21 Sep 2003 (UTC) Removed by: Iseeaboar 03:09, 4 Nov 2003 (UTC)

• Pumping Lemma - removed by User:Technopilgrim but no reason given.

Current nominations

Current nominations without objections (so far)

• Dreyfus Affair - Multipart consideration of complex historical event. jengod 21:09, Jan 16, 2004 (UTC)
  • Seconded -- Smerdis of Tlön 05:49, 17 Jan 2004 (UTC)

• Radar - Pretty good writeup. Alex.tan 06:49, 19 Jan 2004 (UTC)

• Representative peer - very informative, detailed, well-written and interesting. Proteus 00:09, 21 Jan 2004 (UTC)

• Ralph Yarborough - I wrote all of this article starting from nothing using mostly the Handbook of Texas and Texas Almanac. (Jan. 15 8:34CST).
  • I second this. The article is very well-written, and the prose is bright and imaginative. - Scooter 09:23, 18 Jan 2004 (UTC)

• Medieval literature - I'm rather proud of my little child...it's still perhaps on the short side, but I think it's a nice summary of a big topic. If you think it's incomplete, well, tell me why, as I would love to see others join me in expanding the article. :) Jwrosenzweig 16:45, 31 Dec 2003 (UTC)
  • Although I lack much knowledge of the topic, the article is well-written and, considering that it was written largely by a single person, it's thorough. Second. Chris Roy 03:58, 9 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Current self-nominations (need to be seconded)

• Maciste - I assembled and added most of the data; it's as thorough as I know how to make it, about an interesting figure from Italian pop culture. -- Smerdis of Tlön 20:12, 16 Jan 2004 (UTC)

• Japan general election, 2003 - not sure if the writing is brilliant but the article is completely done now.
  • not an objection or a second, just a timestamp to get the clock rolling. Gentgeen 08:40, 18 Jan 2004 (UTC)
  • Fairly well-written, and provided a good analysis. Second. Then again, I'm something of a politics junkie... - Scooter 03:13, 23 Jan 2004 (UTC)

• Poetry of the United States - I like this and others have helped improve it. Bmills 11:07, 7 Jan 2004 (UTC)
  • Very interesting! Second. --Delirium 10:33, Jan 21, 2004 (UTC)

• Restriction enzyme - Needs some formatting of the illustration and would benefit from some art, but the text is very good, I think. 168... 17:42, 7 Jan 2004 (UTC)

• Truncated dodecahedron - Although the current revision is a little less interesting... Κσυπ Cyp   19:13, 7 Jan 2004 (UTC)
  • The current version is fine but not brilliant. The previous version is ummmm... interesting. Very cute but the current version is more appropriate. moink 00:24, 13 Jan 2004 (UTC)

• Philadelphia Experiment - This is almost certainly presumptuous of me, since I only recently listed this article on Misplaced Pages:Peer review, but then, since I got no comment there, I suppose it needs no changes. Keeping NPOV here was difficult, since the topic is rather loopy. I think I did a fair job, but some friends who read the article seemed very impressed, so I was emboldened enough to list it here. - Scooter 06:29, 14 Jan 2004 (UTC)

• Martin Van Buren Bates - A biography of a very tall man. And a fairly good one, or at least, so I like to think. --Delirium 10:46, Jan 21, 2004 (UTC)

• Multiracial - The page states the main concerns of the topic and backs it up with census data for both the US and Britain. There are a few authors with contributions (including myself) ensuring a topic which could be heated is relatively NPOV. Writing style flows well. --zandperl 14:35, 22 Jan 2004 (UTC)

• Cowboy Bebop - I'm rather fond of this one. About as NPOV as I can describe one of my favorite anime titles, especially one that has near universal acclaim. RadicalBender 18:47, 23 Jan 2004 (UTC)
  • Unfortunatly, I object. I've never seen Bebop, so I'm only commenting on the writing, not the facts. Some of the introductuctory material needs to have a good copyedit, and the article needs to be converted to a timeless reporting style. Anything that reads as "even today" should be changed to "as of 2004", or something similar. Gentgeen 09:00, 24 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Nominations with objections (being resolved)

• slashdot trolling phenomenon BL 13:25, Jan 16, 2004 (UTC)
  • seconded, I've never used slashdot but this made everything perfectly clear (and extremely funny). Fabiform 21:46, 20 Jan 2004 (UTC)
  • Support. I'm an avid slashdot reader, so I can say with good knowledge that this is very well written. →Raul654 03:39, Jan 21, 2004 (UTC)
  • Object. Too much original research, too few citations.—Eloquence
    • Disagree. To typical slashdot readers at least, there's nothing original in the whole article. →Raul654 21:44, Jan 21, 2004 (UTC)
      • The more limited knowledge is to a defined group of people, the more important it becomes to back up our claims with citations. If all these phenomena do indeed exist and are as widespread as the article claims, it should be easy to find several examples for each.—Eloquence 00:51, Jan 22, 2004 (UTC)

• Martin Guerre - Comprehensive, smart, well-written. 12.46.6.33 21:35, 13 Jan 2004 (UTC)
  • Article needs headings. Gentgeen 12:46, 17 Jan 2004 (UTC)

• Eureka Stockade - Superb historical retelling. jengod 04:42, Jan 14, 2004 (UTC)
  • The article needs headings. Gentgeen 12:46, 17 Jan 2004 (UTC)
  • Nonsense. This currently fashionable and quite obsessive desire to sprinkle headings over everything in the vain hope that this will make complex and subtle subjects understandable even by morons with a 30-second attention span is one of the sadder aspects of this project. The entry does not need headings. It does, however, need a good copyedit to streamline the language. The fundamentals are there but it needs more work. Tannin 12:57, 17 Jan 2004 (UTC)
    • I disagree, Tannin -- while headlines are sometimes overused, an article of that length should provide the user with three or four headings for basic orientation. So I also object until headings are added.—Eloquence
    • Actually, the Misplaced Pages:Manual of Style recomends using headlines, for they help orginize the article, both for the reader and the contributer. As BP is supposed to be the best articles here, they should conform to our style guide. Gentgeen 08:33, 18 Jan 2004 (UTC)
      • The MoS says a lot of things, some of them good advice, others bad. Life is like that. Sensible use of headings according to the task at hand is good writing. The current mania for putting a heading every 2.37 sentences whether the article needs one or not is bad writing, no two ways about it. A really well-written entry often reads best without headings, which serve only to break the flow. Oh well .. roll on the 30 second attention span. (sigh) Tannin
        • Headings are IMHO vital for reasons of organization and to aid the reader who wants to focus on a specific aspect of an article via the TOC. Bmills 12:38, 21 Jan 2004 (UTC)

• St. Francis Dam - Great integration of fine writing, knowledge of history and engineering and good article design.
  • I object. Seems very anti-Mulholland, needs some copyediting for clairity, for example, the "Also, the dam was built" line in the Construction begins section seems out of place. Gentgeen 12:04, 17 Jan 2004 (UTC)

• Pentecostalism - I found this article to be well written, flows well, and leaves me with a feeling that i've learned something. iHoshie 08:55, 15 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Eh. I think this could be much more complete. And prettier. Aimee Semple McPherson on the other hand, is marvelous. jengod 21:49, Jan 15, 2004 (UTC)

• Jet engine - A complex technology described well and completely. GreatWhiteNortherner 11:03, Jan 12, 2004 (UTC)
  • I object. I read the first three lines and found a bunch of innacuracies. I'll fix those at some point and then you can re-nominate it. moink 00:08, 13 Jan 2004 (UTC)

• Operation Bojinka Mind blowingly thorough, which is what I expect from a wikipedia article. Amazed me repeatedly with how in depth and intricate it is. Jack 04:50, 13 Jan 2004 (UTC)
  • Object. Lead paragraph needs more info so it could stand alone as an entry in a concise encyclopedia. --mav 09:23, 17 Jan 2004 (UTC)
  • Object. Bibliography needs to be in a standardized, useful format. DanKeshet 21:17, Jan 21, 2004 (UTC)

• Japan - good content, balanced and the format and heading are complete. -- Taku
  • Object. Seems far from complete, and some entries seem clumsy and problematic. One user appears to be repeatedly editing the page back to his/her original prose. Exploding Boy 11:41 14 Jan 2004

• Bacteria - great article 217.4.3.238 20:21, 9 Jan 2004 (UTC)
  • Seconded, although the article is actually at Bacterium. Gentgeen 08:54, 11 Jan 2004 (UTC)
  • It's very good. What's with the "history" at the end though? It feels like a "don't edit this, it's been peer-reviewed" warning. moink 00:46, 13 Jan 2004 (UTC)
  • Needed and still needs some work, to my mind, but I've been going at it. I know enough to have spotted a few glaring holes. Still, I'm no bacteriologist, so I really think someone like that (or maybe a physician) ought to look at it.168... 00:08, 14 Jan 2004 (UTC)
  • Not brilliant. Perfectly good, but not brilliant. My credentials: I took one bacteriology course once, thirty-five years ago. My impression: everything that's there is fine, but the coverage is uneven. Heavy on evolution. Light on pathogens, significance in disease, antimicrobial agents... there's a link that says "see more at Pathogen" but Pathogen is practically a stub. Nothing on genetic recombination and bioengineering. Nothing about bacteria as model systems in biology. Not enough on commercial importance of bacteria. Oh, and I think the picture with the candy-colored bacteria looks stupid; and "cocci" may mean "comma-shaped" but that is not how they look. There should be a photomicrograph or two (maybe a pitcher taken with one of them fancy new-fangled scanning electronic microscope things?) It's a perfectly good article, but it doesn't have any "wow" factor for me. Dpbsmith 01:11, 14 Jan 2004 (UTC)

• Richard Wagner - thorough and (AFAICT) accurate article on a prominent classical composer, no brilliant prose listing of any classical music topics, demonstrates NPOV handling of a highly sensitive issue. --Robert Merkel 08:41, 6 Aug 2003 (UTC)
  • Object. Still needs much more on anti-Semitism, particularly concerning theories regarding anti-Semitic motives in Wagner's operas, also on the use of Wagner's music by Hitler (maybe in a separate atricle, but it needs to be there) and scholarly views on Wagner's actual influence on Hitler. Bibliography is hardly comprehensive.—Eloquence 07:32, Aug 9, 2003 (UTC)
  • Second. Excellent article. Too much emphasis on antiseminism detracts from the main subject (his music) and is in danger of being POV. It's fine as it is. 80.255 23:00, 24 Oct 2003 (UTC)
  • Agreed, this article is excellent, for the reasons given by User:Robert Merkel. The writing is bright and engaging, and the NPOV aspect is well-handled. Obviously, Wagner is a complicated personality, and the article could be longer in places - indeed, entire books have been written on the man, with good reason - but this article does a more than competant job in summarizing his life for an encyclopedia. - Scooter 06:21, 14 Jan 2004 (UTC)

• Dim sum - I've no idea who wrote this, but it's very evocative, thorough, and well-written. Scooter 08:17, 31 Dec 2003 (UTC)
  • Sure. It lists more dim sum than I've tried! --Menchi (Talk)â 08:33, 31 Dec 2003 (UTC)
    • Objection: It appears to have northern-China POV, with myths such as connections to the Silk Road -- unless references are produced, I am not convinced. My guess is that many Chinese far from Guangdong would not know what dim sum is. Statements such as 'Almost all Chinese know what dim sum is' should be made VERY CAREFULLY, after substantial surveying about 900 million people! Many items listed also did not give Cantonese (which would be very useful when the dim sum lady with cart comes by.) Sorry to be a killjoy. --Kaihsu Tai 12:23, 2004 Jan 2 (UTC)
      • I don't have enough knowledge to comment on the objection. However, the problem seems to be with the content rather than the prose. If we were to change the parts of the content causing the problems, could we then list it? - Scooter 08:07, 11 Jan 2004 (UTC)

• Alanis Morissette --Kaihsu Tai 20:23, 2003 Dec 30 (UTC)
  • Disagree. The prose has a tendency to ramble, and at times reads more like a record review or a segment of one of those gossipy "Hollywood insider" programs such as Entertainment Tonight instead of an encyclopedia article. The elements of a good article are there, but this needs editing. - Scooter 08:07, 11 Jan 2004 (UTC)
    • Disagree. Doesnt look "clean" and does not really fit into an encyclopedia. Also i don't like the external links to Amazon under Notable works. bbx 15:55, 20 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Nominations from voting

These will rest here for one week, the articles are still on BP and will remain there unless an objection is raised during that time. Bmills 10:01, 19 Jan 2004 (UTC)

One week is far to short a time to judge these articles. : ChrisG 20:51, 20 Jan 2004 (UTC)

People have been voting on them for months. The week is for those who voted Remove to justify that vote. Bmills 09:46, 22 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Philosophy, Mathematics, and Natural Science

• Astronomy and astrophysics
  • Just a disamb page now. Bmills 13:39, 20 Jan 2004 (UTC)

• Carbon
  • I object. The line about the change from diamond to graphite being so slow as to be unnoticeable is incorrect. While it is true that changing carbon from diamond to graphite is an exothermic reaction, and thus will self propigate if started, it does not occur at all at STP, as the activation energy is so high that the reaction does not begin. It's not that it's slow, it doesn't happen at all. That's the big factual error I found, but there might be more. I'll go look more closely. Gentgeen 07:07, 20 Jan 2004 (UTC)

• Cladistics
  • Objection. Needs better orginization. Currently broken up into two sections, I can see atleast two more natural divisions. Also seems to need some copyediting, but nothing specific I can put my finger on, just some tightening up is needed. Gentgeen 08:38, 22 Jan 2004 (UTC)

• Comet

• Computational complexity theory (and related pages)

• Diamond
  • I object. Some items are not well established. For example, the last line in the Sources section is. A city of major importance in diamond trade is Antwerp, Belgium. Yet, there is no meat behind the statement. When did Antwerp become important? Why? Also, in the Symbolism section, we have, The "tradition" of diamonds as engagement rings was created by De Beers as a promotional tool, which they continue to use to this day. Contrary to popular belief, they were not used as engagement rings previous to De Beers's advertising campaign. Where are the supporting statements, what are the refrences? What were used before. In general, I think much of the history of diamonds has been left out. Gentgeen 10:08, 21 Jan 2004 (UTC)

• Earth
  • I object. Granted, it's hard to encompass the whole world in one article, but I can think of a lot of seemingly germane things which the article doesn't cover. Here's an off-the-top-of-my-head list I posted some days back to the article's Talk page: How did the Earth form? What aspect of the Earth or its location do astrobiologists hypothesize as having been crucial to the development of its most idiosyncratic feature--life. How did life emerge and when. Have there been any noteworthy biological events since the appearance of the first cell? How does the emergence and history of life relate to geological and climate evolution? How often is Earth hit by asteroids? What have been the consequences? Do we expect more? How many human-made satellites are there and when did the first one (sputnik) go up? How do people study the Earth? What kind of scientists study it? What questions plague us, if any? What are predicted fates of the Earth? What about the ozone hole? What about the Kyoto protocol? What about geomagnetic reversals?168... 05:22, 17 Jan 2004 (UTC) And where's the mention of or link to Gaia theory?

• Free will

• Game theory
  • Object. I don't like the History section. It feels like it was just tacked on later, and the information would fit better if it were incorporated into the main article with the sections it talks about. Gentgeen 18:19, 20 Jan 2004 (UTC)
  • Obliged to agree. The History is sketchy, and so is the treatment of non-zero-sum games. Things it would benefit from: some mention of attempts to apply GT to political strategy (Rand Corporation and its critics); analysis of whether the reduction of non- to zero-sum game is of any use. Dandrake 03:13, Jan 21, 2004 (UTC)

• Gene

• Glass

• LSD

• Occam's Razor
  • The Numerous ways of expressing it section is a mess. Bmills 13:39, 20 Jan 2004 (UTC)

• Paradox (and related pages)

• Periodic table

• Platypus
  • Needs TOC/Sections. Bmills 13:39, 20 Jan 2004 (UTC)

• Protist (and related pages)
  • This article is a bit short and not too extensive. Few examples of protists are cited, though some are listed at the talk page and could be added. The prose is not particularly evocative - though of course, writing evocative prose concerning protists may be beyond the capability of the best authors. - Scooter 03:32, 22 Jan 2004 (UTC)

• Quantum mechanics

• Rainbow

Applied Arts and Sciences

• Computer numbering formats

• Markup language

• Quantum computer

• Road transport

• Search engine

• Secure computing

• Spamming

• Typewriter

• World Wide Web

Medicine & health

• Anorexia nervosa

• Menstrual cycle

Psychology

• Milgram experiment

Biography

• Achilles
  • I find much of the writing somewhat confusing or akward. For example, the sentence near the beginning on Homer's failure to mention Achilles's weak spot seems self-contradictory and the handling of alternative versions of storied is quite repetitive. Bmills 13:57, 20 Jan 2004 (UTC)

• Alexander the Great
  • Some poor writing. Here's an example:
    • Alexander married several princesses of former Persian territories: Roxana of Bactria; Statira, daughter of Darius III; and Parysatis, daughter of Ochus. However his greatest emotional attachment is generally considered to have been to his companion, and possibly lover, Hephaestion. He also took as lover one of Darius' minions, the eunuch Bagoas, as Plutarch tells us. Roxana eventually gave birth to the boy Alexander IV "Aegus", putatively his son.
  • Now I know that means Alexander's son, but grammatically it could be the eunoch's. And what does "Aegus2 refer to?Bmills 13:57, 20 Jan 2004 (UTC)
  • Object, not to English but to POV. The article minimizes his effect on India, saying that all he did was vandalize some little principalities. This would not explain the quite visible Greek influence on Indian art at the time, nor the usefulness of Alexander as an anchor in figuring out chronology in India. Also, the name Iskander spread in the Muslim world well beyond Central Asia. —Well, OK, I also take exception to the suggested some-people-think comparison to Hitler. Really, I don't like Alexander much, but I'm not aware of any genocidal madness in his case. BTW, what is the difference between a heroic empire builder and Hitler? Dandrake 03:30, Jan 21, 2004 (UTC)

• Ibn Battuta
  • Object, perhaps tilting against political windmills. If you're going to explain what the hajj is, explain it in English; the English word for the relevant city is Mecca. Formally, all this requires is a global search-and-replace; in fact, most of the article looks good & does not hide its points behind unfamiliar language. Dandrake 03:37, Jan 21, 2004 (UTC)
  • Agree with this objection. Bmills 09:48, 21 Jan 2004 (UTC)

• Humphrey Bogart

• Leonardo da Vinci

• Paul Erdös

• Alfred Hitchcock

• Rudyard Kipling
  • Needs TOC. Bmills 13:57, 20 Jan 2004 (UTC)

• Nella Larsen

• Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart

• Joshua A. Norton

• Rhazes

• Rembrandt van Rijn

• Martha Stewart

Culture

• Crime fiction
  • Object. The original article(put on brilliant prose) has been split into three different articles because of length. The existing article needs considerable polishing to make it suitable for brilliant prose.

• Montparnasse

• Prostitution
  • Object. The article is not comprehensive enough.

Economics

• Economics

• History of the English penny (and related pages)

• Euro

• London Congestion Charge
  • (Not a vote, just a note) This was voted 7-1 to keep on the refreshing brilliant prose page. The disenting voice declined to say what could be done to improve the article. Pete/Pcb21 (talk) 12:59, 20 Jan 2004 (UTC)

    In a way, that's what this listing is about. The objector has a few days in which to come up with a specific objection; failing that, the article is accepted. At least, that's how I understand the setup. Dandrake 03:05, Jan 21, 2004 (UTC)

    • Exactly Bmills 09:30, 21 Jan 2004 (UTC)
  • Second retention of Featured articles listing. Bmills 09:50, 22 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Film, TV and radio

• Have I Got News For You

• The Simpsons episodes, for example There's No Disgrace Like Home

Object. While the plot summary seems adequate and the formatting is acceptable, this entry does not provide any reason for its own existence. Is there a point to it besides telling the plot of the episode? Our articles on culture have to do more than recount the story; they should place it in context. DanKeshet

• Star Trek

• Three Colors: Blue
  • Much of this seems to be slightly non-native English. An example:
    • "Blue" is a movie that is impossible for most anyone to fully understand with only one viewing.
  • Also missing commas, etc. Bmills 14:02, 20 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Games

• Blackjack
  • Object. The article itelf notes that it is incomplete; and so it is. It needs at least a reference to Thorpe, who started the counting business by making the first full analysis of the odds (or to whoever is claimed to have beaten him to it). Dandrake 05:23, Jan 21, 2004 (UTC) Since there's at least a minimal reference, objection withdrawn. Dandrake 21:03, Jan 22, 2004 (UTC)
    • It is now less incomplete than it was. References Thorpe and Uston. No longer proclaims its own incompleteness. Pete/Pcb21 (talk) 09:26, 22 Jan 2004 (UTC)

• Chess strategy and tactics
  • I object. Much of the article is written in the second person; I think that such sections should be converted to the third person, as doing so would make it seem less like a chess manual. Secondly, some explanations are lacking in some areas. For instance, it is suggested that "In the endgame, if there is a passed pawn which is a candidate for promotion, the rooks, both friend and foe of the pawn, belong behind the pawn rather than in front of it." The beginner, however, would not know why rooks belong behind rather than in front of a pawn. Lastly, I would recommend that in the section on doubled pawns, it be noted that doubled pawns are often accompanied by an adjacent open file, which could counter-balance the faults of the doubled pawns. But in any case, the discussion might become moot, as the idea that the article is more like a guide (in my opinion, especially due to its use of the second person), and therefore deserves to be moved to Wikibooks is being discussed. -- Lord Emsworth 02:26, Jan 21, 2004 (UTC)

• Poker

• Prisoner's dilemma

• Pub quiz

• Sample chess game

• Rock, Paper, Scissors

Language

• Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis
  • Needs TOC. The sentence So-called politically correct language stems from the belief that using (for example) sexist language tends to make one think in a sexist manner. seems just to have been thrown in. Criticisms need to include the case of people without language: can they think? Bmills 14:05, 20 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Music

• Jazz

• Madonna

• Roy Orbison

• Punk rock

• Saxophone

• Simon and Garfunkel
  • Needs TOC. Bmills 14:05, 20 Jan 2004 (UTC)

History

• Battle of Jutland
  • Object. The prose is not brilliant, though the article is good. Needs a good deal of copy editing. Dandrake 04:23, Jan 21, 2004 (UTC)
  • second the objection. DanKeshet 21:12, Jan 21, 2004 (UTC)

• Behistun Inscription

• Byzantine Empire

• Chinese history
  • Object, regretfully. Needs copy editing by native English speakers. Hesitantly doing some, but people with subject-matter knowledge could do better. Dandrake 05:34, Jan 21, 2004 (UTC) In too many places the exact meaning cannot be made out, making mere copy editing impossible. Unfortunately, till the contributors who worked hard to get it this far take a renewed interest in it, it can't be made ready for prime time. Dandrake 05:50, Jan 24, 2004 (UTC)

• Falkland Islands War
  • Object. Besides distractingly redundant linking, this article includes impossibly detailed information--down to exact quotes!--without one citation or attribution I can find. DanKeshet 21:35, Jan 21, 2004 (UTC)

• History of Egypt
  • Object. This is just a pointer to the other articles in the history of egypt series. To be listed here, it should summarize them. DanKeshet 21:12, Jan 21, 2004 (UTC)

• History of England
  • Object. The formatting on the page is very ugly, including lots of self-references and confusing explanatory notes and distractively excessive linking. Needs better formatting into 'series' style. DanKeshet 21:26, Jan 21, 2004 (UTC)

• History of Germany

• History of Levant
  • Object. This needs some better standard formatting, with an opening paragraph, a brief description of what the Levant is, and a description of the period after the rise of Islam. DanKeshet 17:52, Jan 22, 2004 (UTC)

• History of Scotland

• History of the Netherlands

• Irish Houses of Parliament

• Operation Market Garden

• Peloponnesian War

Religion and beliefs

• Christianity

• End times
  • Keep - Kingturtle

• Greek mythology (and related pages)

• Norse mythology (category)

• Sons of Noah

Law

• Copyright

• Negligence

Military

• Tank history
  • Object. As the article itself indicates, it needs vastly more on non-German history. Dandrake 04:22, Jan 21, 2004 (UTC)

Politics

• Anarchism
  • Reads like a string of unconnected sentences in parts. Bmills 14:13, 20 Jan 2004 (UTC)

• Gough Whitlam

• Libertarian socialism

• Propaganda

Sport

• Bodyline (cricket)

• Montreal Canadiens

• Summer Olympic Games

Other

• Gulliver's Travels
  • Object. A consistently gushing tone of "this is the greatest satire ever". POV of the applicability of much of the satire after 250 years needs review. E.g., the "special cant and jargon" of lawyers may refer to the survival of old legal French, not really applicable now. Dandrake 04:33, Jan 21, 2004 (UTC)

• Hebrew calendar

• Leet

• Tea

Nominations withdrawn by nominator