Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Need for Speed/archive1

Need for Speed edit

Support. This article is good. Ken20008 03:02, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Object. One particular concern is that the article is not properly sourced. ╫ ２５ ^{◀RingADing▶} 13:28, 1 November 2006 (UTC) ╫[reply]

Comment "...pasting the template at the top of the list of candidates." Alexj2002 13:37, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Noted. ╫ ２５ ^{◀RingADing▶} 14:33, 1 November 2006 (UTC) ╫[reply]

Peer review might be helpful, after all the cite tags are dealt with, and a readthrough of WP:WIAFA, WP:LEAD and WP:MOS. Sandy (Talk) 13:41, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Object While some of the games are well described, some games on the opening list barely have one sentance while some have several paragraphs so try evening this out. Understandably some games will be more significant than others, but it is too lopsided at the moment. Also some more information on the development of the series as a whole would be nice as the two paragraphs following the lead really leave something to be desired. Perhaps take some information out of the headers for the individual games and put them in their own heading. Also some critical reaction to the game series as a whole would be nice, rather than just for the individual games, and perhaps some information about the how Need for Speed has influencd (or failed to influence) the driving simualtion genre videogame. Also i second all of the objections mentioned above. A few hours good work and research on some sources and this'll be ready. Thethinredline 14:11, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Object - just not ready. Look at some of the game articles in WP:FA. First of all, the lead is really not long enough (WP:LEAD). Secondly, many more references are needed and 'citation needed' tags are present! Also, some of the images lack sufficient fair use rationale and some have none. Refer to peer review first. CloudNine 15:25, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- The issue of image rationales has been addressed. ╫ ２５ ^{◀RingADing▶} 11:42, 3 November 2006 (UTC) ╫[reply]
Strong Object - there are multipe citation and verification tags on it. Plus per above. Rlevse 17:37, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Object per citation issues raised above.UberCryxic 22:38, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]