Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/I Don't Remember
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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 promoted 01:51, 21 January 2008.
I'm nominating this article for featured article because we've been around the block a few times with this article. It reached GA possibly a little prematurely a few months back, and was then delisted. It failed it's next GAN, but finally bounced back in November and passed GA. We've just been through an exhaustively thorough Peer Review process and believe the article now meets the Featured Article criteria. As a wikiproject (WP:FING), this is our first Featured Article submission for a song (we have several Featured articles and lists about the band, discography, albums and awards, but this is kind of new territory for us). rm 'w avu 13:35, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I endorse this nomination! Just a note, this article has been the source of some ArbCom related DRAMA (don't ask if you don't know...) - but try and keep that out of your mind when reviewing :) It's a much better article now. Dihydrogen Monoxide 13:37, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Support I did one of the peer reviews on this article, and all of my suggestions were enacted. It is a quality article about a song, and is comprehensive, well-written, well-referenced and clearly within WIAFA standards... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 15:08, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Support. I can't say I'm the most neutral onlooker who will offer input, but I think the changes the article has undergone since the new year speak for themselves. As it stands, the article is exhaustive and concisely expressed. I'm not sure any more could be asked of it. Seegoon (talk) 16:24, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- If the single didn't chart on US and NZ charts, then why are they listed in the table? Tables should be used only when the information to make a table cannot be presented in any other way, so the way I see it is the that the table itself is totally unnecessary. Kill the table, and keep the information in prose. Muy bueno :) Spebi 21:09, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Done. Dihydrogen Monoxide 10:22, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- What about the sample, is that in accordance with NFCC? Also, is it possible that could be integrated into the first section, where it would probably be a bit more relevant? Spebi 00:19, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Done. Dihydrogen Monoxide 10:22, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak support per my comments in the peer review, although I think this article is a touch on the short side for the featured article criteria. However, such a suggestion is inactionable when all referencable material is already in it, so support. Daniel (talk) 10:35, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Support Very well written and sourced. (however I think ciations in the lead should be saved for quotes) I have been reviewing Powderfinger articles lately, and the people in WP:FING are very dedicated and prolific with their work. Great article. —Burningclean [Speak the truth!] 23:42, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comments left on the talk page. --BritandBeyonce (talk) 00:26, 17 January 2008 (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 candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.