Wikipedia:Featured article review/Franklin D. Roosevelt/archive1
- The following is an archived discussion of a featured article review. Please do not modify it. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page or at Wikipedia talk:Featured article review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The article was removed by YellowAssessmentMonkey 02:32, 11 February 2010 [1].
Review commentary
edit- Featured article candidates/Franklin D. Roosevelt/archive1
- Featured article candidates/Franklin D. Roosevelt/archive2
| Toolbox |
|---|
I am nominating this featured article for review because of a lack of formatting for many of the citations, sections of questionable importance, and sections without citations. Although the article is generally good, it could do with improvement. Some areas of improvement:
- Many (about 20) lack formatting; some are merely hyperlinks, others provide inadequate information which renders them useless.
- The sections on "Coat of Arms", "Boy Scouts supporter" and "Limousine" seem unimportant.
- Further, two of these sections ("Coat of Arms" and "Limousine") are not referenced.
- "Administration, Cabinet, and Supreme Court appointments 1933–1945" requires a better layout.
- Citations are needed generally in other areas (end of the "Fourth term").
- Prose could be tightened in places. MasterOfHisOwnDomain (talk) 19:22, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- File review
- File:FDR speech.ogg: What's the CC license all about? What's the real source and license supposed to be?
- File:Sunshine Special -6.jpg: source is an internet forum. "Johnny of Cadillac Club Message Forum" is not the copyright owner.
- Other files OK.
The external links and bibliography sections need trimming/splitting off. DrKiernan (talk) 14:40, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- The speech should be {{PD-USGov}}, of course, since FDR had been a federal employee for at least a minute or so by the time he delivered it. However, ideally there would be a source for this. Obviously the authorship is clear enough, but it would be better to have a provenance. Chick Bowen 06:16, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Please add alt text to images; see WP:ALT. Eubulides (talk) 07:19, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- A few of the concerns raised above are a bit vague. For example, how does that particular section need a better layout? –Juliancolton | Talk 04:41, 26 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- The table takes up the entirety of the left side, squeezing the text onto the right and leaving a huge margin. As well, the image above pushes the text further down. MasterOfHisOwnDomain (talk) 15:27, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
FARC commentary
edit- Suggested featured article criterion concerns are uncited passages, undue weight, prose. YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 02:27, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delist, I see many chunks of uncited passages. Cirt (talk) 22:28, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. I think we can keep this one, with some work. I'll have a look. UltraExactZZ Said ~ Did 18:45, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Please ping my talk page when you're ready for me to have a look. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:25, 19 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Progress? YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 06:38, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I trimmed some unsourced material several weeks ago, but haven't had time to get further into it. Let me take a closer look today, and I'll report back. I see a lot of sources, so it's possible that this might be more of an exercise in matching passage to source, rather than hunting for new sources - but there are a lot of unsourced passages. UltraExactZZ Said ~ Did 14:17, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.