Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Chadian-Sudanese conflict

Chadian-Sudanese conflict edit

I've worked on Chadian-Sudanese conflict for a while. Aldux suggested I nominate it for fac, but I was hesistant as the stability of the situation was unclear. Now that the situation is relatively stable, and the references are standardized, I believe it meets the requirements of a featured article. It's been my pet project and I think it exemplifies my best work. KI 00:36, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Reluctant object. It's a good article, but the prose is awkward in a few places and the images require fair use rationale. Also, is it really necessary to have such a small section ("Interview with Opheera McDoom")? It should either be split or merged with another part of the article. Overall, good work, but I'm not quite ready to support yet. —Eternal Equinox | talk 03:19, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure this is presented properly. It's being characterized as a conflict between Sudan and Chad, but really I think it makes more sense to characterize it as a rebellion against Deby with some associated tension between the two governments. Everyking 06:37, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I've added the "interview with opheera mcdoom" content onto the "intention for further aggression" and added a section on "Chadian support for Sudanese rebels." KI 15:18, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. The situation with the refugees from Central Africa needs to be put into context. Just why are people fleeing into a zone of conflict? Also there are far too many one-sentence paragraphs. -- Run e Welsh | ταλκ 15:38, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. The article is still labeled as current event. Brandmeister 16:05, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Object - this article is still a current event, even if it's not tagged as such anymore; the present tense used in some cases add to that effect (i.e. Chad still wants...). (Oh, by the way, Chad doesn't want anything, the government of Chad wants something. That's a technicality, though, that's been in common use, but I thought I'd bring it up anyways.) In addition, several of the sections are extremely brief and need either more expanded or merging. Finally, in the "Chadian demands" section, I'd prefer that the bullet points for the four demands be turned into prose. Thanks! Flcelloguy (A note?) 16:27, 19 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Object per Flcelloguy. -- S iva1979^{Talk to me} 14:48, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Object as it is still a current event. --Ter e nc e Ong 13:02, 22 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]