Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Primeval/archive1
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 19:48, 21 March 2008.
I'm nominating this article for featured article because Primeval is an extremely popular ITV science fiction show with a lengthly but detailed article to match. The page covers most aspects of the series, and the pages linking off of it do the rest. Me and User:Nubula are the key editirs for the show that I know of, but the main Primeval page gets alot of edits. That's all I really need to say, feel free to look around the article. Please leave comments. --- Cuddly Panda (talk · contribs) review me! |my chatroom] 12:30, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose - only short sections and tables, you must work for the GA review. MOJSKA 666 (msg) 12:58, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: Image:Primeval cast.jpg fails WP:NFCC#1, which states "non-free content is used only where no free equivalent is available, or could be created" The FUR asserts a purpose of "To illustrate the cast of the TV series". As a still-running program with living cast members, it seems perfectly reasonable to expect that a free "cast" image could be obtained (e.g. from a press conference, "red carpet" event, etc.) ЭLСОВВОLД talk 15:25, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comments Many many references lack publisher and last access dates, which is the minimum needed. Some are bald urls, which is also a MOS issue. Please format into a standard format. Link tool also shows a dead link to "Kanal 9: 48 Hours". Will try to return to judge the sources for RS after they are formatted. Ealdgyth | Talk 17:28, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose per above (bad ref formatting, too short, just tables,...). The article may be of B status at the moment. Please improve it to GA status first; you will find many good ideas how such an article might look, at WP:GA and WP:FA. – sgeureka t•c 13:22, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.