Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Charlemagne/archive1

Charlemagne

Very long and well-detailed article, and has few flaws. Well for flaws, I never really checked, but its extreme length definitely makes it quality. --NicAgent 00:16, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Object. For starters, the lead is far too short and references are insufficient. There are no inline citations. —Cuivi é nen 01:23, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Object for no inline citation and 57 kb length, right to begin with. Staxringold _talk^contribs 01:58, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Object - Image:Charlemagnecrown.jpg needs proper tagging/Fair use rationale. --light darkness^(talk) 03:00, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I generally agree with the above, but this one has a lot of raw material and is well worth working on. This can be gotten to FA status with effort. Sam 14:32, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Object. I was just thinking the same as Sam, that this article would be well worth bringing to FA status. But as for nominating it now, especially on the argument that while it hasn't been checked for flaws "its extreme length definitely makes it quality" — uh, that's more a case for removing per WP:SNOW (=not a snowball's chance in hell). I have suggested to the nominator on his page that he might like to de-list it for now. Bishonen | talk 14:47, 14 June 2006 (UTC).[reply]

If delisted now, I would support for an Article Improvement Drive. Sam 14:51, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The nominator very reasonably agrees with de-listing it and has placed a speedy tag on this page (which I've removed, there's no need to delete it), so I'll just remove it from the FAC page now. Bishonen | talk 18:37, 14 June 2006 (UTC).[reply]