Wikipedia:Article improvement drive/Removed/13 March 2005

Forest

 * Reason: A short, but extremely incomplete article. Even the linked forest type do not necessary have material on the ecology of a forest.


 * Support
 * 1) Circeus 18:37, Feb 27, 2005 (UTC)
 * 2) Maurreen 07:24, 4 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 3) Guettarda 14:13, 8 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 4) Hippalus 11:47, Mar 9, 2005 (UTC)
 * 5) kaal 03:47, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * It may be so short that it would qualify for COTW. 119 04:22, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Bay Area Rapid Transit

 * Reason: I think this is within spitting distance of being an FAC, but since this project seems more active than peer review, being here might get the distance finished faster. The main shortcoming seems to be the currently very incomplete history, but there is much info easily gathered from the official site and places like a BART critique, such that I don't think it would take serious visits to the library to flesh it out--just someone(somepeople) to synthesize the info into NPOV, encyclopedic discussion. The FAC nominator so far has not addressed the objections, even tho', like I say, it seems quite do-able. (It already has nice pics, and I hope to add some when the weather clears, but they're forecasting clouds and rain here thru the weekend.) Niteowlneils 13:13, 24 Feb 2005 (UTC)


 * Support


 * Comments

Poetry

 * Reason: Saw this on the featured article removal candidates. It's a holdover from the less stringent FA rules, I'd guess. It definitely needs work -- that list is ugly, it's nowhere near comprehensive and there's a single reference! --Dmcdevit 07:35, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)


 * Support
 * 1) Maurreen 03:56, 2 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 2) Lockeownzj00 06:43, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 3) Litefantastic 20:27, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)


 * Comments

Voyager 1

 * Reason: Both the voyager missions did a lot of science and very little is covered in the article.


 * Support
 * 1) 119 00:43, 2 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 2) kaal 02:29, 2 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 3) Litefantastic 12:06, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Comments
 * cannot nominate for the COTW as not stub, but still very brief.
 * Maybe it would be better to combine both Voyager missions in one article. Maurreen 05:19, 7 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * What, like the Voyager program, or something to that effect? -Litefantastic 12:28, 7 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Both voyager missions should have substantial articles is what i feel and i will soon start work on it hopefully. There is lot to be written for both the missions. kaal 19:16, 7 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Voyager 2

 * Reason: Both the voyager missions did a lot of science and very little is covered in the article.


 * Support
 * 1) 119 00:43, 2 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 2) kaal 02:30, 2 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 3) Litefantastic 12:06, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Comments
 * cannot nominate for the COTW as not stub, but still very brief.
 * This is the Article improvement Drive, not the Collaberation of the Week. This is for non-stub articles to be improved. Peb1991 22:08, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * I think that's what 'e meant. -Litefantastic 22:24, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Non-Aligned Movement

 * Reason: Extensively linked-to article which is currently very far from comprehensive and lacks references.


 * Support
 * 1) 119 00:44, 2 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 2) Maurreen 03:55, 2 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 3) Hippalus 11:48, Mar 9, 2005 (UTC)


 * Comments

Balsamic vinegar

 * Reason: Copyright violation has crippled this article


 * Support
 * 1) Litefantastic 12:34, 2 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 2) --PopUpPirate 17:29, Mar 2, 2005 (UTC)
 * 3) NTK 03:04, 8 Mar 2005 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * Copyrighted content meant the article is pretty much empty, could be a really good article with effort. Not a stub so unsuitable for COTW--PopUpPirate 15:27, Mar 1, 2005 (UTC)
 * It's a stub. 119 00:43, 2 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * I'd've thought so, but over at COTW they said it wasn't --PopUpPirate 11:18, Mar 2, 2005 (UTC)

Anthropology

 * Reason: Writing is dense. Lacks references.


 * Support
 * 1) Maurreen 07:31, 2 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 2) Pharos 01:06, 7 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 3) Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 12:50, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)


 * Comments

Asia

 * Reason: Fairly shallow. More of an annotated list than an article.


 * Support
 * 1) Maurreen 00:41, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)


 * Comments

History of sculpture

 * Reason: Also in nomination at COTW, but more appropriate here: lacks links, see also, categories, everything after ancient times. Bad article hierarchy too.


 * Support
 * 1) Circeus 02:14, Mar 6, 2005 (UTC)
 * 2) Djadek 14:49, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Comments