Wikipedia:Featured article review/Surface weather analysis/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) 4:49, 5 February 2022 (UTC) [1].

Surface weather analysis

Notified: Thegreatdr, MiamiProf, Runningonbrains, Tmangray, WikiProject Weather, talk page notification 2021-12-04

Review section

I am nominating this featured article for review because there are large swaths of unsourced text. There is also plenty of more recent academic literature that needs to be incorporated. The article's history section is 20 years outdated. Surely something has happened since 2001. Lastly, the article needs a thorough copy edit to fix numerous Grammar issues. Noah^Talk 22:43, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This article is part of Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/WikiProject Tropical cyclones (see page 3), and based on what I found at the Tornado FAR, it is likely to have unattributed copying within and unattributed public domain text. There are no {{Copied}} templates on talk, and no {{Pd-notice}} templates in the article. As an example, this edit did have unattributed public domain text, so the article will need a thorough check. This is not an insurmountable problem; it just requires time to check and add the necessary attributions (see the sample at the Tornado FAR) to make sure the article complies with WP:WIAFA 1f. If someone intends to restore this article to FA status, this work will need to be done. I should also note that the number of dead links and missing publishers in the citations a) invalidate Earwig results (which would need to check archive.org versions of dead links), and b) make it hard to locate the public domain sources, so the first step would be to clean up the citations to add archive.org verions and to add publishers. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:24, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Move to FARC due to the concerns above being unaddressed. Noah^Talk 14:58, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Move to FARC zero progress. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:08, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

FARC section

Issues raised in the review section include sourcing and currency. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:44, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delist No progress has been made. Noah^Talk 16:58, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delist. Tagged for unsourced statements. DrKay (talk) 14:00, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delist, considerable issues, no progress. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:38, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delist - needs major improvements. Hog Farm _Talk 21:59, 24 January 2022 (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) 04:49, 5 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.