Wikipedia:Featured article review/Psilocybin/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 delisted by Nikkimaria via FACBot (talk) 6:17, 4 March 2023 (UTC) [1].
Psilocybin edit
- Notified: Sasata, WikiProject Fungi, [2] WikiProject Neuroscience [3] talk page notice 2021-12-14
Review section edit
I am nominating this featured article for review because there are presently two big orange WP:MEDRS templates regarding the article leaning too heavily on primary sources. The last paragraph of the legal status section is entirely uncited and has two {{Citation needed}} templates. I just got done 86ing some poorly cited (and outright uncited) sentences the Mystical experiences section that conflates two medical journal articles with some guy's self-published blog; that usually doesn't bode well for such a densely-cited article. I have no experience with the Featured article process and am far from a subject-matter expert on pharmacology, but it's seems that this article has either fallen out of spec with WP:MEDRS or has somewhat degenerated in the decade and change since it was promoted. Another user on the Talk page has proposed starting a FA review on grounds of sourcing issues and scope creep, so I am not alone in this suspicion. DigitalIceAge (talk) 07:35, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- I have notified the remaining WikiProjects (WP Chemicals and Pharmacology) and added the talk page notice to the Notification line above. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 11:28, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
This article was promoted in 2012 (by me, after a long MEDRS discussion). Sasata has not edited it since 2015, and has been gone since 2016. The article does not look salvageable from here without serious engagement from an editor familiar with MEDRS, and updated per WP:MEDDATE. (Please review the FAC discussion, as the unfortunate removal of the lay parameter from the citation templates might have been part-- but not all-- of the problem here.) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 11:44, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- @Bon courage: SandyGeorgia (Talk) 11:41, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- @Zefr, Beland, and Smartse: (others who could have been notified). SandyGeorgia (Talk) 11:49, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- My apologies, thanks for pinging those people, @SandyGeorgia: XTools was broken last night, and I couldn't get a reading on any other main contributors from the article history. DigitalIceAge (talk) 16:59, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- DigitalIceAge Not to worry (most of the wiki is broken right now thanks to Vector 2022), and these editors would not have shown as top contributors by the tools anyway ... I pinged them because they are recent editors, and I queried some of the MEDRS stuff when I promoted the article, but the destruction of the lay parameter by subsequent changes to the citation template may have messed up the sourcing. This needs a closer look, but probably not worth it, as there should be newer sources that can be used. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:59, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- My apologies, thanks for pinging those people, @SandyGeorgia: XTools was broken last night, and I couldn't get a reading on any other main contributors from the article history. DigitalIceAge (talk) 16:59, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Move to FARC, valid maintenance tags, no progress. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:13, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Move to FARC, I trust Sandy's judgment on this one. Hog Farm Talk 02:05, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Move to FARC progress has stalled, concerns remain. No progress on resolving the orange banners. Z1720 (talk) 16:37, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
FARC section edit
- Sourcing. Nikkimaria (talk) 04:11, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Delist, limited engagement during FAR has not addressed issues. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:01, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Delist per above, as several sections need substantive work. Hog Farm Talk 15:07, 2 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Delist no progress towards addressing concerns in the orange banners. Z1720 (talk) 18:18, 2 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Closing note: This removal candidate has been delisted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please leave the {{featured article review}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Nikkimaria (talk) 16:17, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.