Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Flat Earth/archive1

Flat Earth

This is a good article and has been a succesful collaberation of religious historians and science historians in the wiki environment. It mirrors the prevelance of straw man argumentation in modern society and the breakdown of dialogue between science and religion while simotaniously prooving that in the wiki environment such discussion can take place and defeating misrepresentations within that dialoguge is something all parties can help to break down. Home Computer 19:30, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

• Comment The article is quite listy, especially the "In popular culture" section. Prose would be better than lists in these cases. Jay32183 23:55, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
• Object Remove the popular culture section, incorporate the really notable ones in the article instead. Borisblue 03:41, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
• Reluctant Object. I've actually read this article before, and liked it, but I cannot support it for FA status for two reasons: it has a pop culture section, and it lacks non-Western perspective. ergot 00:35, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
• Object per ergot. Plus, the referencing style is mixed (there is at least one direct external link in addition to the footnotes) and it's way too listy. Mikker ^(...) 02:10, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
• Comment: I'd be willing to "prosify" the work, add a bit of vocab variety, and add an Asian/Indian perspective. At this point, maybe it couldn't be a featured article, but if I'm not busy with school and all (which might not happen that soon), I might be able to make it a quaint Main Page thing. I'd prefer to read a book upon it first, though. Gracenotes ^T § 23:33, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
  • The article could be featured, it just needs a lot of work. If you would like to work on it and have the time, then feel free. Jay32183 01:31, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
  • I would gladly support it for FA status if you were to do that. If it wouldn't be too much trouble, I would appreciate it if you could let me know on my talk page if it is nominated again, as I don't get a chance to look at FA candidates often enough. ergot 23:01, 23 October 2006 (UTC)