Wikipedia:Featured article review/Torajan people/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 delisted by Nikkimaria via FACBot (talk) 3:17, 12 February 2022 (UTC) [1].
- Notified: User talk:Indon, User talk:Outriggr (2006-2009), WikiProject Indonesia, WikiProject Ethnic groups, WikiProject Death, 31 Dec
Review section
[edit]I am nominating this featured article for review because of verifiability issues and lack of RS, as detailed on the talk page (t · c) buidhe 08:59, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Move to FARC no edits. (t · c) buidhe 05:44, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Move to FARC, no progress. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:42, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Move to FARC: large swaths of unsourced or poorly sourced text remain. (In addition to the unreliable sources that Buidhe mentioned on the talk page, amazingnotes.com is a blog and incitoprima.com is selling tourist excursions.) Extraordinary Writ (talk) 01:33, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- I see Chainwit. has added some references, although the ruparupa source might be a blog? Hog Farm Talk 15:16, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- It is a commercial website with no academical reliability. It's not a good ref too. --Chainwit. (talk) 16:04, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- I see Chainwit. has added some references, although the ruparupa source might be a blog? Hog Farm Talk 15:16, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
FARC section
[edit]- Issues raised in the review section include sourcing. DrKay (talk) 17:06, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- A couple of refs were added, but we're still far from fixing the sourcing problems with this article. (t · c) buidhe 19:55, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Delist still has 16 cn tags and other sourcing issues (unreliability) (t · c) buidhe 19:05, 5 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Delist while Chainwit. made excellent progress on adding citations, there have been no edits from them since Jan. 25 and concerns still remain. I will strike this vote if Chainwit. returns or someone else steps up to make improvements. Z1720 (talk) 03:15, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Delist - a long way to go in citation quality and quantity. Hog Farm Talk 02:37, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Closing note: This removal candidate has been delisted, 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. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:17, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.