Wikipedia:Featured article review/Pashtun people/archive2
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 removed by User:Joelr31 14:40, 5 December 2008 [1].
Review commentary
[edit]- WikiProjects notified
Article lacks sources in many places, and these are badly formatted or mostly from adhoc websites that are not reliable. MOS violations. MAny single sentence paragraphs. Has also been the subject of edit wars from anons which has caused a bit of irregularness in the presentation of the article. YellowMonkey (click here to choose Australia's next top model) 05:19, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Issues with images:
- Image:AhmadShahDurrani.jpg lacks permission, source.
- Image:Nv-army-gray BG.jpg, source, date not given to support PD in India claim.
- Image:Sharbat Gula.png: no fair use rationale.--Redtigerxyz (talk) 14:52, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
FARC commentary
[edit]- Suggested FA criteria concerns are reliable sources (1c), MoS (2), and stability (1e). Marskell (talk) 14:48, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Remove. Per YellowMonkey (talk · contribs). Cirt (talk) 17:58, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Remove Citation needed markers should be replaced with reliable sources verifying the claims made. The rationale for Image:Sharbat Gula.png is too weak: it's just a picture of a girl, so fair use doesn't apply. In addition the citation at the end of the sentence, "The difficult lives of Afghan female refugees gained considerable notoriety with the iconic image of the so-called "Afghan Girl" (Sharbat Gula) depicted on the June 1985 cover of National Geographic magazine." does not support the claims made in the sentence. It is a link to the article but it does not confirm that the image is iconic. That would require a third-party source referring to the image and the article. The Image:Mamoud Tarzi-203.jpg has no author information, so the fact that one of the sitters died over 70 years ago is irrelevant. The important factors are when the photograph was first published and when the portraitist died. Image:Ahmed Shah Durrani.png is not acceptable. The uploader is a sockpuppet of an impersonator, and on flikr it says very explicitly "all rights reserved". I have tagged this image as a copyright violation. DrKiernan (talk) 17:38, 20 November 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.