Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Chris Gardner/archive1

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 review. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was not promoted 00:11, 11 February 2007.

Chris Gardner

Feature article candidate. New promotion. After many hours of work, this article is ready for featured article status. This article has come a long way from where it was a couple months ago. It's currently rated at GA status and has gone through a peer review. I feel that it is comprehensive on the subject & accurate. It has been greatly expanded, with references and citations. It's the most comprehensive biography on Gardner out there. The peer review is here.
Trade2tradewell 15:24, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

please hold off while I fix this dramatically wrong submission - it's listed as a FAR, not a FAC. I'll do the moves to correct. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:08, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think everything is corrected now. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:15, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments WP:MOS problems - I corrected for WP:MSH, full dates are not wiki'd per WP:DATE, solo year wikilinks should be removed unless they provide WP:CONTEXT, publisher not identified on all sources (e.g.; ^ "Man Who Inspired B.O. Hit Skips Opening"), and the article is heavily sourced to Gardner's own website.

SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:37, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

1. full dates are not wiki'd per WP:DATE

2. solo year wikilinks should be removed unless they provide WP:CONTEXT,

3. publisher not identified on all sources (e.g.; ^ "Man Who Inspired B.O. Hit Skips Opening")

- I have identified the publisher for this source.Trade2tradewell 13:03, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

4. the article is heavily sourced to Gardner's own website.

Oppose. The lead needs work. The first sentence goes into excessive detail, naming where and with whom he struggled with homelessness - is it really first-sentence material? Sentences like "After the birth of his first, son Chris Jr. (born in 1981)" are messy and have redundancies. "Within the next several years," is vague. "Today" should avoided as it will ecome out-of-date. We get told his firstborn is called "Chris" three times in the lead. I haven't read any further. Trebor 15:01, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

1. The lead needs work. The first sentence goes into excessive detail, naming where and with whom he struggled with homelessness - is it really first-sentence material?

2. Sentences like "After the birth of his first, son Chris Jr. (born in 1981)" are messy and have redundancies.

3. "Within the next several years," is vague.

4. "Today" should avoided as it will become out-of-date.

- I have replaced Today with As of 2006.Trade2tradewell 13:03, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

5. We get told his firstborn is called "Chris" three times in the lead.

Oppose - unnecessary fair use media, both the book cover and movie poster appear to just be used as decoration.--Peta 00:06, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article review. No further edits should be made to this page.