Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/History of climate change science/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 candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was archived by Ian Rose via FACBot (talk) 13:46, 15 August 2018 [1].

History of climate change science

Nominator(s): prokaryotes (talk) 00:41, 15 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Article about the history of climate science, rated a level-5 vital article in History, well written, comprehensive, and appears to meet requirements. prokaryotes (talk) 00:41, 15 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Was there really nobody before modern times who thought about how past climates and weather may have been different from their own climates/Weather? Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 08:13, 15 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose, suggest withdrawal/closure While I commend prokaryotes for working on this very important topic and think the article is in OK shape, it clearly doesn't meet the FA criteria at present. My specific concerns are:

Not all material is referenced, including an entire paragraph
Covering the massive body of work which has been done on climate change science since 1988 in two short paras is clearly inadequate: this is now a major area of scientific inquiry, and climate change science has been at the centre of the policy and political processes which have tried to develop responses. Such a section also needs to cover the rise of climate change denial over this period.

I'd suggest that the article be further fleshed out, and go though a Good article nomination before returning to FAC. Nick-D (talk) 08:54, 15 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Coord note -- I echo Nick's points, and am going to archive this nom to allow work to progress outside the FAC process. I notice that under the heading FA nomination on the article talk page, several editors are being pinged for suggested improvements. This is commendable but should take place prior to a FAC nomination. I'd suggest that after that the article undergo a formal Peer Review, as well as GAN, and then consider re-nominating here. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 13:45, 15 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Closing note: This candidate has been archived, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FAC/ar, and leave the {{featured article candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Ian Rose (talk) 13:46, 15 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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