Wikipedia:Featured article review/Shroud of Turin/archive1

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 08:20, 29 November 2007.

Shroud of Turin

Review commentary

Wikipedia:WikiProject Catholicism notified; Wikipedia:WikiProject Rational Skepticism notified; User:JDG notified; User:Johnstone notified; User:Eloquence notified

Extreme lack of inline citations. Citation needed tags all over this article, and a reference needed tag at the top. There are also original research tags along with unverified claims tags. It is clear that (until these are fixed) this article no longer meets the FA criteria. PeterSymonds 09:02, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Not sure why it would be FA based on what I see on the page--Will2k 02:49, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The lead is very short also. Pagra shtak 14:56, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's table of contents is all over the place too --Hadseys 18:05, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

FARC commentary

Suggested FA criteria concerns are citations and OR (1c), and ToC (2b). Marskell 10:26, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

....oh dear. Still a long way to go. Needs alot of refs and copyedit to tighten up text. Fingers crossed.cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 09:34, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree; plus MOS breaches aplenty. Tony (talk) 14:19, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Remove FA status. "The controversy" needs references else should be considered WP:OR.--Redtigerxyz (talk) 12:58, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article review. No further edits should be made to this page.