Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Chennai Super Kings/archive3
- The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.
The article was not promoted by SandyGeorgia 16:56, 25 April 2011 [1].
Chennai Super Kings (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
| Toolbox |
|---|
- Nominator(s): Taxiboy277 (talk) 08:28, 23 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I am nominating this for featured article because the article is based on a very important club that is a part of the Indian Premier League.The Indian Premier League is the most followed tournament in the cricketing world and is one of the biggest sporting events in the world.The Chennai Super Kings have also won the Champions League Twenty20 which makes them the top domestic club in the planet.I have added references and removed many unwanted statistics to improve the quality of the page than before.Please suggest changes to the page rather than opposing the nomination right away.If those are minor and feasible they can be incorporated. Taxiboy277 (talk) 08:28, 23 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose
- This article is still lacking sufficient references, and those that are part of the article are still formatted poorly, including only the title of the reference, providing no author, publisher or date information.
- Furthermore the quality of the writing and the article as a whole is below the standard required for FA status. (For example, "Matthew Hayden has planned to set up a youth academy in Chennai and wants to take the help of Rahul Dravid and his Super Kings coach Stephen Fleming in the venture."
- There is significant overlinking throughout the article.
There are more issues, but suffice to say that this is not anywhere near featured article status at the moment. I'd recommend taking it away, putting it through a copy edit, a peer review, probably taking it to Good Article first, then probably another peer review. It'll be a long process, but worth it if it can come back at the right standard. It should also be noted that the proximity of the three pretty quick fails will give the article some negative attention if it is to come back again within a few months without huge improvements. Harrias talk 11:12, 23 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Suggest withdrawal no indication that the two main contributors have been consulted Jimfbleak - talk to me? 12:11, 23 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose – Referencing is insufficient for a featured article. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 02:03, 24 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose - major problems with referencing in particular. Please see WP:V, and include at minimum one footnote per paragraph, usually more. Also, web references need publisher and access date. Nikkimaria (talk) 12:55, 24 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose - I believe that there is quite a problem with referencing, but working on referencing will bring more information and hopefully reliable sources will be used. --Another Type of Zombie talk 14:07, 24 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose References are not formatted (ie: no publisher information, access date etc). There's a definite issue with sourcing. For example the second paragraph of the history section is unreferenced and the main chunk of the 2008 season section is referenced to this which doesn't mention anything about the impact of Oram, Hussey, and Hauden leaving. The article also suffers from some pretty poor prose ("The side had finished third at the league table with 16 points", or how about "CSK started their IPL 2011 campaign with a thrilling win against Kolkata Knight Riders in Chennai by just 2 runs but lost their next game in a thriller to the Kings XI Punjab ... This match was followed by another thriller against Mumbai Indians". Repetition of the word "thriller" and variations thereof suggest problems with POV to boot). Attention also needs to be paid to the correct use of tense; there's at least one case where the 2010 season slips into the future tense. In short, the article is a long way from being ready. Nev1 (talk) 14:57, 25 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.