Wikipedia:Featured article review/Tiananmen Square protests of 1989/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 removed 10:05, 30 May 2007.
Tiananmen Square protests of 1989[edit]
Review commentary[edit]
- Messages left at User talk:Rebecca, China, Chinese history and Chinese politics. LuciferMorgan 14:58, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Article was promoted to FA-class three years ago and has not been reviewed yet in all three years. It looks very under-referenced, and because of the controversial nature of the topic, article is possibly POV. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 04:43, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Hong, you shouldn't say things like "is probably POV". You should say why you believe it is POV - otherwise you should request a POV check. However the lack of citations has to be resolved. John Smith's 09:33, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment A quick glance shows serious 1c issues. Quadzilla99 04:55, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Other issues at a quick glance, dates displayed as May 19th 1989, May 27th of 1989, full dates not linked.
One or two section headers start with "The".Quadzilla99 05:10, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]- The section headers are fixed, the dates still need fixing some of the ones in the pic captions even say "on May 5th, 1989" and all full dates should be linked. Quadzilla99 01:24, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Other issues at a quick glance, dates displayed as May 19th 1989, May 27th of 1989, full dates not linked.
- Several non-free images lack article-specific fair use rationale. I've struck the license of Image:Tiananmen Hand Poster.jpg, which said that the author is unknown, but is licensed under CC-by-sa-2.5. Pagrashtak 05:56, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. Obvious 1c issues with lack of references (and the ones there are need tidying). External links need trimming, as does See also (for instance, it includes a link to Tiananmen Square which is linked in the first paragraph). Stubby sections and paragraphs. A lot of work needed. Trebor 14:55, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
FARC commentary[edit]
- Suggested FA criteria concerns are references (1c), links and sectioning (2), POV (1d). Marskell 06:16, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Remove 1c and MoS issues mostly. Quadzilla99 14:23, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Remove per 1c. LuciferMorgan 12:57, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Remove, little progress, mostly uncited, short choppy sections, some cleanup needed of MOS issues. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 05:44, 28 May 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.