Wikipedia:Featured article review/Toilets in Japan/archive2

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 02:33, 30 June 2010 [1].

Toilets in Japan

Review commentary

Notified: Yelyos, Chris 73, WP Japan

I am nominating this featured article for review because this is a 2004 FA that had its last review in 2006 and currently tops the FA cleanup list. There are numerous (justified) citation needed tags, as well as other untagged areas that need references. These areas include opinions and statistics that should not be without references. There are also many deadlinks, including some that appear to have been linking to information that was only available online, meaning the sections of the article are now effectively unreferenced. There is also information that appears only tangentially related, such as the (uncited) paragraph on Swiss toilets at the end of the article. A few references need to be combined used the named reference feature (such as 26 and 32) to match the other references that used that feature, and there are a couple of dab links. Dana boomer (talk) 18:12, 3 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

FARC commentary

Featured article criterion of concern are sourcing and focus. YellowMonkey (vote in the Southern Stars and White Ferns supermodel photo poll) 04:21, 17 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delist - Only a pair of bot edits since I nominated the article at FAR. All of the issues I listed still need to be addressed. Dana boomer (talk) 01:43, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I decided to mention this here rather then the talk page. IMHO the article goes into a bit too much detail on the advantages and disadvantages of squat toilets. While some detail is obviously useful, considering squat toilets are hardly unique to Japan a lot of the info isn't either, it probably should be reduced and further summarised (moved to the primary article if it isn't already there) Nil Einne (talk) 23:10, 28 June 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.