Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Punt (boat)/archive1
- The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.
The article was not promoted 00:03, 17 April 2008.
Punt (boat)[edit]
I'm nominating this article for featured article because I've put lots of work into it over the years and it now meets all the FA criteria (at least I think it does, but please let me have your honest opinions!) Thruston (talk) 21:52, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
- http://www.cambridgerivertour.com/ (current ref 9 Campbell, Tim "Campaign to save..) is lacking a publisher (which would be Save Independent Punting, I think) and a last access date.
- Is http://www.archim.org.uk/eureka/50/archimedeans.html a online version of a print publication? If so, it should be formatted just like a printed work (book, journal, etc.) with the addition of a link to the site and a last access date.
- http://www.veniceonthecreek.com/ is lacking a publisher information
Oppose: (ec) Too few inline citations, entire sections go unreferenced. Too many short stubby paragraphs. External links should not be in the prose of the text. In an article about England (mainly) why are the primary units in feet? In fact why are feet mentioned at all, shouldn't it all be metres? Per MoS, emdashes should go unspaced. Shouldn't this article be moved to "Punting in England"? indopug (talk) 22:05, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Object - lack of inline references. Too many external links bordering on spruiking various Punting organisations. Also, the quote taglines at the front of the seections are unencyclopedic. Blnguyen ([[U ser talk:Blnguyen|bananabucket]]) 06:59, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose – the sections are in casual-sistemation: links --> ext links --> bibliography --> notes. MOJSKA 666 - Leave a message here 14:44, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: Image:Rivington-Punting-1983-Cover-art.jpg violates WP:NFCC#3A ("one [fair use image] is used only if necessary"). It is not necessary to "illuminate" references. Author, Title, Publisher, ISBN, etc. are all quite sufficient. Although moot, image is also not low resolution (NFCC#3B), does not appear to contribute significantly to our understanding (NFCC#8) and punt-related imagery thereon could be replaced with free alternatives (NFCC#1). ЭLСОВВОLД talk 22:08, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: thanks for these comments, it's great to have new eyes look at it. I'll slowly work on fixing some of these and wait a-while before pushing Punt (boat) above the FA parapet again.Thruston (talk) 16:54, 16 April 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.