Wikipedia:Featured article review/South Australian state election, 2006/archive1
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- The following is an archived discussion of a featured article review. Please do not modify it. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page or at Wikipedia talk:Featured article review. No further edits should be made to this page.
The article was delisted by DrKiernan via FACBot (talk) 0:12, 11 May 2015 (UTC) [1].
South Australian state election, 2006[edit]
- Notified: Timeshift9, WikiProject Australia, WikiProject Elections and Referendums, WikiProject Australian politics, WikiProject South Australia
Review section[edit]
I am nominating this featured article for review because: 1. There's a lot uncited sentences; 2. The lead is too short, doesn't covered even half of the article. Promoted December 14, 2006, talk page notice March 2. Nominator still very active, notefied.Jarodalien (talk) 00:56, 10 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- I think this is definitely evidence of how standards have changed over time. I think it basically meets GA status (or if not, at least could with a small amount of work), but falls well short of modern FA standards. The Drover's Wife (talk) 11:58, 10 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
FARC section[edit]
- Issues raised in the review section concerned referencing and lead issues. Nikkimaria (talk) 04:54, 24 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Delist DragonZero (Talk · Contribs) 04:51, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Delist, nothing happening. And that infobox is utterly dreadful-- it takes over my whole screen. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:44, 3 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Delist - Numerous 1- and 2-sentence paragraphs, a 1-sentence subsection, unbelievably large infobox and tables, WP:MOSCOLOR issues with background shading in tables, uncited text, bare urls in citations, and an insufficient lead. FA standards sure have changed. Maralia (talk) 05:15, 5 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Delist, another 2 weeks passed, still nothing happened.--Jarodalien (talk) 15:14, 7 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Closing note: This removal candidate has been delisted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please leave the {{featured article review}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. DrKiernan (talk) 20:12, 11 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.