Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Wishology/archive2
- 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 01:29, 15 August 2011 [1].
Wishology (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
| Toolbox |
|---|
- Nominator(s): 89119 (talk) 06:53, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The article's first FAC nomination failed mainly because the issue was pointed out that it was yet needed to be copy-edited (admittedly I was a bit impatient so I initially thought skipping the CEs would be okay). Someone finally got to my request at the WP:GOCE page, and here are this user's copy-edits: [2][3][4]. All that in mind, and assuming this article might match up with FA criteria, I put this article up for renomination. 89119 (talk) 06:53, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Procedural close - the previous nomination was closed 3 August, less than two weeks ago. Per the FAC instructions, you must either wait 2 weeks or seek delegate permission to renominate early when your nomination is archived. Nikkimaria (talk) 13:58, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- How can we go about to seek delegate permission? Because the previous nomination was, as mentioned above, closed early due to a need of a copy-editor, and thus did not get a chance for a full article scrutiny by others. Now that the copy-editing is done, I was hoping this one could get a chance of a full review, though I understand if FAC instructions still need to be followed regardless and this nomination need to be procedurally closed. (If this nomination is closed, does the two week waiting period reset from today?) 89119 (talk) 20:09, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Your best bet would be to post to one of their talk pages (probably either User talk:SandyGeorgia or User talk:Karanacs). My understanding is so long as this nom is procedurally closed (not failed), the waiting period would not reset. Nikkimaria (talk) 21:11, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Oppose. This will likely be closed, but just for the record... I shan't conduct an in-depth review, but the plot summaries in both the main section and the lead are written quite childishly. For example, the last paragraph includes "Cosmo is fed up with..." Why not simply "Cosmo is angry with" or "Cosmo is at his wits' end"? "Fed up with" is rather colloquial. It is important that you summarize well, because the plot summary is often all that readers view in articles about fiction. Interchangeable|talk to me|what I've changed 00:22, 13 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Since there are more problems with the article beyond fundamental copy-editing issues, as pointed out by User:Interchangeable so far, I advocate this nomination should be closed procedurally, and hope to seek further improvements with writing prose at a more professional standard. 89119 (talk) 03:08, 13 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose per above. We have our WP:WAF and WP:MOSTV guidelines. JJ98 (Talk / Contributions) 23:30, 14 August 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.