Wikipedia:Articles for improvement/Archives/Unsuccessful Nominations/January 2013

This page lists the TAFI nominations that were closed as unsuccessful in January 2013.

Swami Vivekananda
(Biography) This month is this person's 150th birth anniversary which is being celebrated worldwide. Some close paraphrasing issue was mentioned in the FA review which has been attempted to fix, Can we please include this article in this month's TAFI?

Just wording, prose style, grammar etc copyedit. --Tito Dutta (talk) 17:40, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Requirement

Support

Oppose Comments
 * 1) Sorry, but unfortunately that article is wayyyyyyy too developed for it to be any use to this project.  This is more for stub/start-class articles on relatively important topics, to allow for easy editing. It's easier to add a couple of paragraphs here, a couple of quotes there etc., rather than copyediting an entire article. It's a brilliant article though. I wish you all the best with your FA endevours :D.--Coin945 (talk) 18:30, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
 * If you want I can delete few paragraphs, add some dead links, dablinks and make it a C class article and after TAFI's edit, I'll re-add those paragraphs, will it be okay? Anywa, jokes apart, the only thing I am requesting is just read paragraphs and make "wording" and "prose" related changes. That's all. --Tito Dutta (talk) 18:40, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Please understand that I meant no offense. I know that's all you were asking for, but I was just letting you know that this is not the best forum to seek help on nearly-completed articles. That's not to say that the article is not worth working on - not at all - but it will not make a good TAFI article. I'm afraid to say that it will almost certainly be opposed because it goes against the TAFI critera for nominated articles.. i was just letting you be prepared of what you may have to face. :)--Coin945 (talk) 18:51, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Withdrawn! --Tito Dutta (talk) 19:00, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Maldives
(Geography) This article, although long, is not very well organized. Unlike other country articles, this article does not cover all the topics which need to be covered in a country article and some sections are longer than they need to be and some sections are very short. This article would surely be a benefit to readers if it is developed. Ushau97 (talk) 08:41, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Support
 * 1) Ushau97 (talk) 08:41, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Oppose
 * 1) Weakly per the comment below. It's nearly 9,000 words, and TAFI seems more along the lines of getting the information in rather than cleaning and tweaking it.  Wizardman  23:33, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Comments
 * I like the concept, but I'm not sure about selecting a C class article. C is probably the upper ceiling of TAFI. -- Nick Penguin ( contribs ) 16:44, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I'd have to agree. That article seems relatively developed, and we'd be approaching "copyediting rather than strictly adding text" territory.--Coin945 (talk) 12:13, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Bedrock
This is a major subject in Earth Science. However, This article has only about 130 words, and two references! --Horai 551 (talk) 11:05, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

Support Comments
 * 1) --Horai 551 (talk) 11:05, 15 October 2012 (UTC)
 * 2) Given how short the article is. —WFC— FL wishlist 05:52, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Mud
(Science) Not even sure if it's notable.... but if it is, this start article (with a "Well-known idioms" section, and sentences like "Children like to make mud pies as well as throw mud at each other and play barefoot in mud" and "Mud and dirt can be consumed accidentally during sports and other outdoor activities [leading to] dysphemisms for poor-tasting food such as 'tastes like dirt'") could use a whole lot of lovin'.Coin945 (talk) 17:46, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

Support Oppose
 * 1) Coin945 (talk) 17:46, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
 * 2) -- Nick  Penguin ( contribs ) 00:48, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
 * 3) Needs more citations, certainly.  A few unsourced and rather silly statements (possibly by inexperienced editors making their very first attempts) do not, I believe, serve to make the article's subject matter any less noteworthy, though they may (on balance) serve to obscure actual notability by giving undue weight to relatively trivial aspects of notable topics, the entries for which may languish stubbily for years, remaining quite severely underdeveloped in comparison to their actual potential.  Lots of unrealized potentials for collaborative development into a truly great encyclopedia entry here.  ༺།།ༀ་ཨཱཿ་ཧཱུྃ།།འཚེར།།xeltifon།།སར་ཝ་མང་ག་ལམ།།༻ &#123;say it&#125; &#123;contribs&#125; 08:21, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
 * 1) Certainly not my vision of what the daily article for improvement is for. Maybe if we were constructing an encyclopedia for six year olds this would be a high priority topic for FA status... Carrite (talk) 04:20, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Comments

Louis XIV of France
(Biography/History) Highly important historical figure; article a FFA and currently at C-class. dci &#124;  TALK   02:10, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Support
 * 1) dci  &#124;  TALK   02:10, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Oppose

Comments It seems sufficiently improved in my opinion. -- Nick Penguin ( contribs ) 09:05, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Perry Mason (novels)
(Arts) 3rd best-selling book series of all time....and it's a start-class. Coin945 (talk) 17:17, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Support
 * 1) Coin945 (talk) 17:17, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Oppose

Comments

Algebraic logic
(Math) Significant form of logic, needs inline citations, expansion.-- Nick Penguin ( contribs ) 17:33, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Support

Oppose

Comments

World's fair
(Society) A well-known topic rated at C-class that would benefit from collaboration. Northamerica1000(talk) 21:10, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Support
 * 1) Northamerica1000(talk) 21:10, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Oppose

Comments

Occult science
(Society) One sided, needs criticism section, expanded authors/figures. -- Nick Penguin ( contribs ) 19:25, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Support
 * 1) -- Nick  Penguin ( contribs ) 19:25, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Oppose

Comment

Institute of Regional Studies
(Society) Needs a bit of expansion, adding of categories etc. Jackiespeel (talk) 11:08, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

Support
 * 1) Jackiespeel (talk) 11:08, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

Oppose
 * 1) While the topic and scope of the institute is interesting, it may not appeal to a wide variety of editors. Northamerica1000(talk) 18:58, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Comments