Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Sociocultural evolution/archive2

Sociocultural evolution edit

2nd attempt, self-nom. Hopefully it will get more then 4 votes it did last time. I think objections are adressed: pics have proper copyright notice, several references and footnotes are added and lead has been decresed by 25%. I feel that any further reduction of lead would damage the article (see also Wikipedia 1.0 lead requirements), besides, we have many FAs with longer leads. Click here for former nomination. Your comments, as always, much welcome. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 00:02, 20 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Support A long read, but well presented and argued. The only change that I would make would be to shorten the sections that have their own articles (such as Neoevolutionism and Sociobiology). slambo 02:01, August 22, 2005 (UTC)

Support Really well written. I don't understand the creation of the Overview section (I never though the intro was too long), but it doesn't matter. Also I don't know if you need to repeat all of the references that are also in the notes section. -MechBrowman 03:54, August 24, 2005 (UTC)

Support Looks good, Piotrus. The lead is definitely more readable, and the rest of the article is quite comprehensive. --Pariah 03:13, August 25, 2005 (UTC)

Conditional support descriptive captions on the images would be good.--nixie 00:16, 30 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Support--Cyberjunkie | Talk 05:31, 31 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]