This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Reywas92 (talk | contribs) at 13:25, 4 April 2008 (→Angkor Wat: re). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 13:25, 4 April 2008 by Reywas92 (talk | contribs) (→Angkor Wat: re)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)Angkor Wat
I am nominating this article for review as I feel it no longer meets the FA criteria. Most concerning is its failure of 1c and 2c with whole paragraphs being appearing to be completely unsourced and confusing mix of referencing styles used. I also feel it fails criteria 3 with an excessive amount of images that flow all the way down the external link sections. Most are unnecessary and do not illustrate the sections they are in and appear to have been added for decoration. It also fails criteria 2a and WP:LEAD in that it does not adequately summarize the entire article. Collectonian (talk) 02:33, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
- Collectonian, You practically ruined Jeopardy! in many ways, and I don't want you defeaturing this. I'll start today with the images and move on to the refs soon. I'm not an author, so someone else can work on the lead. Reywas92 12:55, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
- Was such a comment really necessary? How about a little civility. Collectonian (talk) 13:11, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
- Sorry, but the edits I've seen of you, especially on Jeopardy, are removing valid references, removing interesting info that is supposedly too crufty, and then tagging it with things you did. Rather than hurting the project by having one less FA, I'm going to attempt to actually make the article better. Reywas92 13:25, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
- Was such a comment really necessary? How about a little civility. Collectonian (talk) 13:11, 4 April 2008 (UTC)