Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Anarcho-capitalism

Anarcho-capitalism
Resubmit. I think the POV issues as such are dealt with. View the earlier submission here : Featured article candidates/Anarcho-capitalism/Archive 1 Saswann 19:52, 8 August 2005 (UTC)


 * Support It's as qualified as any other featured article I've seen. RJII 20:05, 8 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Support It will be even better if some pictorial explanation are shown on the Criticisms of anarcho-capitalism section. De ryc  k C.  07:50, 9 August 2005 (UTC)
 * I placed a picture in the section, we'll see how other editors accept it Saswann 13:13, 9 August 2005 (UTC)


 * Support Superb effort. Is it possible to use a map like the ones used in Political spectrum to illustrate its philosophy. pamri 10:58, August 9, 2005 (UTC)
 * Are you saying there should be an example using one of the other existing maps listed in Political spectrum, (other than, or in addition to the existing one?) Saswann 12:26, 9 August 2005 (UTC)


 * Support Nice job on a controversial subject, detailed footnotes, good NPOV. It's a little dull, and could use some livening up, IMO. It might help if there were some images earlier in the article, and maybe some snappy quotes that aren't about economics.--Bcrowell 17:04, 9 August 2005 (UTC)
 * I agree with that. Maybe a picture of one of the anarcho-capitalism symbols can be put in. RJII 17:06, 9 August 2005 (UTC)
 * The lead, in particular, is agonizing. A potential reader already has to overcome some barriers to get motivated to read the article (obscure topic, sounds like an oxymoron, never tried in practice as a real social system), and the boring lead is going to decrease readers' interest even more. --Bcrowell 17:10, 9 August 2005 (UTC)
 * I switched the first two paragraphs around. That should make it a little more approachable, since the first was really tortuous. RJII 17:49, 9 August 2005 (UTC)


 * Support. well written and NPOV, good history on something only tried in theory.   &rarr;ub&#949;r n&#949;mo &rarr;  lóquï 17:24, August 9, 2005 (UTC)
 * Support. Well written and balanced, also on the criticism side. --Tmh 16:53, 13 August 2005 (UTC)