Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/International Academy of Business/archive1
Tools
Actions
General
Print/export
In other projects
Appearance
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 not promoted by SandyGeorgia 14:45, 10 November 2011 [1].
International Academy of Business (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Toolbox |
---|
- Nominator(s): Mheidegger (talk) 07:38, 10 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I am nominating this for featured article because it totally opens knowledge about the academy. In the Kazakh Wikipedia the article became featured. Mheidegger (talk) 07:38, 10 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose and speedy fail there is absolutely no way that this is close to be one of the finest articles on the English Wikipedia, even if its equivalent article is featured elsewhere. The second sentence of the lead, for example, is "IAB is one the first business higher schools in Kazakhstan — the Academy has been organized in 1988 as Alma-Ata School of Managers, in 1996 it has been transformed into the International Academy of Business." That is a very poorly written sentence, and Wikipedia stopped including links to years like 1988 a long time ago. You may want to take this to peer review to get further feedback, and it needs a thorough copy-edit by someone with a better grasp of English, since at the moment it reads more like a machine translation. In the meantime I will leave you a welcome message on your talk page, which nobody else has done in the couple of months you've been around I'm sorry to see. BencherliteTalk 10:14, 10 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
See Wikipedia:Peer review/International Academy of Business/archive1 and WP:FAC instructions-- articles should not be at Peer review and FAC at the same time. This article should remain at Peer review, and perhaps then consider WP:GAN before returning to FAC. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:44, 10 November 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.