Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Disneyland/archive1

I believe that Disneyland should be a featured article on Wikipedia simply because of the vast attention to detail that all contributors have put into it. It is one of the finest and most informative articles on Wikipedia without becoming too daunting. It is not biased, with opinions rarely seen. There is information about it's creation right through to what is going on immediately now. I think it deserves credit, and I think the best way for the article to recieve credit is for it to be featured on Wikipedia's main page.

Andy, 9 January 2005, 13:18 (UTC)

Object. No references and far too short lead section for an article this size. Johnleemk | Talk 13:24, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Object: needs totally resectioning - it's currently quite confusing and some top-level headers are far too short. violet/riga (t) 14:31, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Object. It needs a lot more work, which I've been putting into it today, but there's still more to be done - it contained much redundant information and duplicated information in List of current Disneyland attractions, and contained a bit of POV-ish text. - Brian Kendig 03:24, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)
- I'm starting to agree with what you are saying. When it has been drastically cleared up, I'll apply again. By the way, what does POV mean? Andy 17:32, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  - "POV" means "point of view," or text that's subtly or overtly subjective. See WP:NPOV. - Brian Kendig 02:23, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Support There has been quite a bit of collaborative improvements done on this article since it was nominated, although discussion about improvements has been on the article's talk page instead of here, and a couple of related articles also got written and/or improved in the process. I believe that the POV stuff has been addressed. It's worth an fresh look and maybe a vote if you looked it over and withheld judgment earlier, as I did. After, all , let's not forget, it all started with a mouse. <gr> Vaoverland 05:13, Jan 19, 2005 (UTC)