Wikipedia:Featured article review/Acetic acid/archive1
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- The following is an archived discussion of a featured article review. Please do not modify it. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page or at Wikipedia talk:Featured article review. No further edits should be made to this page.
The article was kept by User:Dana boomer on 07:56, 23 August 2013 [1].
I am nominating this featured article for review because there are many paragraphs in this article that lacks citations, thus failing criteria 1c. I will notify Wikiproject Chemistry and Wikiproject Science. I brought this issue up at the article's talk page, but there doesn't seem to be anyone interested.--FutureTrillionaire (talk) 19:52, 30 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- I have made an improvement to a consistent standard with references. Journal names spelled out in full. DOI's should be included where they exist. Also referenced the citation needed statements, and bits with no refs. External links updated. There is also an earlier request "Can someone add something about how acetate is metabolized? Does it react spontaneously with CoA and then enter the citric acid cycle". that I have not addressed. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 12:52, 9 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Nice job. However, the in the Safety section, the EU classification table needs a source.--FutureTrillionaire (talk) 14:16, 9 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- I have addressed that problem, but what happens next? Graeme Bartlett (talk) 12:38, 12 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Nice job. However, the in the Safety section, the EU classification table needs a source.--FutureTrillionaire (talk) 14:16, 9 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - I don't see anymore issues that should prevent this article from keeping its FA status.--FutureTrillionaire (talk) 01:03, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- There's a page notice telling me the article is written in British English, but it reads "millimeter and centimeter wavelength". There's also a mixture of "catalysed/catalyzed" whereas the other instances of -ize/-ization are written with a z. Whichever way this is standardized, I'd leave "sulfur" as that appears to be the recommended spelling at least according to Sulfur#Spelling and etymology. DrKiernan (talk) 14:28, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- OK I have changed the spelling to US consistently and blanked the edit notice. The other words changed were colour vapour and fibre. People are free to change as long as I don't see the very ugly looking millimetre or centimetre. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 11:08, 21 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Closing note: This removal candidate has been kept, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please leave the {{featured article review}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Dana boomer (talk) 11:56, 23 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.