Wikipedia:Featured article review/Air Force One/archive2

Article is still a Featured article.

This aricle I feel don't live up to feature standard, primary becaus it seems not to cite it's sources. _→AzaToth 14:31, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy keep. Prior discussions on WT:FARC seem to indicate we have an agreement not to defeature articles which cite sources but lack footnotes. This article has a prominent "Sources and further reading" section, so it is perfectly acceptable. Somebody ought to go separate the sources from the further reading, and rename the section, though. Last but not least, these concerns have not been brought up on the talk, a requirement of FARC. Johnleemk | Talk 05:40, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Remove. There are sections in the article that must be cited (preferable in-line), it's a requirement (See: Wikipedia:What_is_a_featured_article 2a).
- For example, in "Analogues in other countries" the statement "No other mode of transportation for government executives is as well-known as Air Force One" requires a source.
- "Popular culture" needs a clean up.
- The Air Force One movie poster is missing its caption.
- In the lead there's a statement that says "can accommodate more than 70 passengers" however, the infobox and the "Capability and features" section claim that it can hold 100 passengers.

Unless these issues are quickly addressed, I would say that this article should no longer be featured. --Enano275 15:03, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment please follow the nomination procedure which clearly states that "Before listing here: post comments detailing the article's deficiencies on its talk page, and leave time for them to be addressed before nominating the article here.". My suggestion is to withdraw this FARC and post concerns in talk page. Joelito (talk) 16:06, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Invalid nomination. Due for removal later today. Tony 04:26, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]