Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Charles Manson/archive1

Charles Manson edit

Has been through peer review (link above) where an issue about lists was solved. The article is well written, and covers the subject in sufficient detail. If there are any reasons to object I'll try to address them. — Wackymacs 21:14, 24 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Object. "References" and "Further reading" sections need to be broken out seperately. Article has only two citations, both of which are inline external links -- there is no way for the reader to tell what fact is referenced by which book. Example: due to his erratic and arguably dangerous and insane behavior, it is highly unlikely he will ever be released -- whose opinion is this? Ours? I appreciate the restrained use of images. There is a weirdly-placed and emphasized external link at the end of the "Aftermath" section. Stylistically, I think that the "Media" section is too long, and the article in the "See also" section does not need that much prominence and could easily be moved into the prose. I will be happy to support once the article is thoroughly sourced, but I hope that some of my stylistic suggestions are considered. Jkelly 21:41, 24 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Object. Article is fairly well written and thorough. However, the external link in the aftermath section mentioned above should be moved or incorporated into the article. Again, there are no citations within the article, using {{ref|#}} and notes {{note|#}} at the References section to create citations and then organizing the references section. However, if these issues are addressed, it could still use some work and expansion, especially with several 1-2 sentence paragraphs. AndyZ 15:10, 25 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Object no explicit sources! Plus isn't this in bad taste to lead the whole project with, even for just one day? Well edited article though: very consise without losing content. Perhaps this alone should merit an award? --HasBeen 08:58, 28 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Being a Featured Article is not the same as being on the Main Page. Also, the subject of an article cannot be used as an objection. Theoretically, any article which can survive AFD can become featured. - The Catfish 05:49, 29 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Comment True, but this honour pretty much puts such entries into the queue for the front page, right? "The director makes selections from the pool of featured articles in accordance with these guidelines. If you want to nominate an article to appear on the front page, please do so on this page's talk page. The article must already have featured status".It's not that I'm objecting necessarily on stuffy grounds, as much as pre-empting a particular line of attack for people wanting to rubbish the wiki project. The article itself highlights the huge interest in Manson as a warped guru; do we want to run the risk of being accused of abetting this? Just a thought, not a direct challenge to the entry as such... The referencing part is the objection really. --HasBeen 09:36, 29 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

No. Articles are only put into the queue for Main Page if they are added by a user, they are not automatically put there by an admin when they achieve featured status. This wouldn't be a bad nomination for the main page - There has been worse on the Main Page before, among with other murderers and serial killers. I'll see what I can do about referencing the article better with in-line citations. — Wackymacs 11:01, 29 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]