Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/David Rockefeller/archive1
- The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.
The article was not promoted 22:39, 13 June 2007.
David Rockefeller edit
Very impressive article of high quality. Tomer T 21:27, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment I really have a problem with fly-by noms. Right off the LEAD is way too short. I note there is no discussion on the article talk page about nominating nor at the talk page of the biggest contributor. I agree that the article looks very promising but who is going to address the issues which come up here?cheers, Cas Liber | talk | contribs 21:56, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I have left a note with the main contributer. Please take it up on Tomers talk page, not here. -Ravedave 22:04, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose, lead too short, references are sporadic and are improperly formatted, a couple sections are too listy, and it lacks an image. The nominator has not made an edit to the article as mentioned above...the top three editors are as follows. -- Phoenix2 (holla) 23:02, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- QuantumOne (talk · contribs) -- 501 edits
- Crosbiesmith (talk · contribs) -- 10 edits
- Jerryseinfeld (talk · contribs) -- 9 edits
- Oppose. The article is not a GA yet, so try to reach that first. Some of the problems - move quotations to Wikiquote and only link to them; trim down the "See also" and "External links" sections; Rename, reformat and trim down sections like "Some Awards", "Some positions held/institutions founded during his lifetime" and "Bibliography"; find free images.--Svetovid 07:56, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose Lead too short, 'The family estate: Pocantico' section too short. Obviously not ready for FA yet. Premature nomination. — Wackymacs 13:38, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Opose. It really needs an image. But my main thing would be, there is a "Bibliography" then "significant mentions for the bibliography" the "notes" then "references". Where does one thing start and the other end. It therefore can't be verifiable. Its just an overwhelming article I couldnt even be arsed to read a tiny bit.Whataboutbob 22:27, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Would even an image of Rockefeller Center be helpful here? -- Phoenix2 (holla) 04:56, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.