Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Retina/archive1

Retina edit

This article is informative and helpful and appears stable; it is also well organized, readable, and well cited. Therefore I nominate it as a candidate featured article. zowie 22:19, 25 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Needs inline citations for starters. Gflores ^Talk 22:56, 25 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Object. There are no inline citations and too many lists that should be converted to prose. Research has to be expanded. Plus, this article should've gone through Peer Review first. AndyZ 23:09, 25 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Stellar article with solid information. It needs references, but it doesn't need one style over another (dang it, folks, get over your hobgoblins). Parenthetical references would be fine. Object until the bibliography is cited in some form or another. Geogre 16:02, 26 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Will be happy to support - when it has a reference section. Good interesting article Giano | talk 16:04, 26 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Object. Needs to have lists converted to prse, and needs to have a seperate refernces section. Also, some sections seem too short and should be merged together or expanded, as the lead section should be. RyanGerbil10 16:10, 26 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comments - I assume the "Bibliography" and some or all of the "External links" are References? If so, please create a References section. The prose is choppy in parts (the short paragraphs in the "Diagnosis and treatment" section could be usefully consolidated and/or expanded), and the lists in the sections "Retinal anatomy" and "Diseases and disorders" could also be expanded a little. Otherwise, a nice, concise article. -- ALoan (Talk) 16:37, 26 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment per Giano. Will support with references section. Good article. Metta Bubble 02:55, 28 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
supportwell written, imformativeAnlace 04:46, 30 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]