Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Bayreuth Festival/archive2

Bayreuth Festival
Article is being resubmitted after addressing various objections (see Peer Review and archive). Current article is complete with references to sources and other data and covers the history of the festival from its conception to the current day.
 * Can we have a link to the archive please? Giano | talk 15:41, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Linked it, but the PR is extremely short. AndyZ 20:37, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
 * That's its peer review, I'm looking for all the FA comments. There is something odd here if you check the history comments seem to have disappeared.  I'm sure when it was on FA I last time. I made more comments than are listed here.  Why has the FAC failed been removed from the talk page here ? -  which should link to all previous discussion  - but doesn't seem to - am I comfusing it with another recent Wagneresque page? Giano | talk 13:15, 20 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Object. Article contains rather many short 1-sentence paragraphs. There are no inline citations, 2(c) of FA criteria, and the years should be delinked except for those with months/dates: see Only make links that are relevant to the context. AndyZ 20:37, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Three of those one sentence paragaphs actually belonged to a single paragraph and for some reason didn't appear that way. I have fixed that. That leaves three more. The first is in the introduction and relates to an expanded discussion of the topic in the text. The other two were fixed by combining them with other related paragraphs, including moving one to another section. Hopefully, this addresses the objection. Dtaw2001 20:57, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
 * As per the inline references, these are not needed when the topic is "uncontrovercial" and cites few sources. According to Wikipedia Style Guidelines:"The system of presenting references in a Wikipedia article may change over time; it is more important to have clarity and consistency in an article than to adhere to any particular system. Sometimes — for example, when the article treats an uncontroversial or simple topic, and draws on a few, widely accepted general sources — it is sufficient to provide a "References" section at the end of the article..."see Citing sources However, there were two paragraphs that relate to specific sources and I have added inline reference links for those paragraphs. Dtaw2001 21:22, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
 * My idea is that whatever should be verified is verified. That ensures than an article is factually accurate. AndyZ 00:44, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment I added the origins of the festival section based on objections I raised in the first FA. It is not, however, sourced or referenced and should be verified before this becomes FA. Eusebeus 16:59, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Eusebeus, since you added the section, only you can reference the sources (assuming they are different than those already cited). I think the history provided in this section is also covered in Spotts' book. Dtaw2001 21:36, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
 * I don't think we actually have to bother with actually citing sources/references since the content is not a matter of dispute. What I meant to say (rather garbled way of expressing myself above) is that someone with a greater familiarity with the topic should confirm the accuracy of my account. Eusebeus 10:01, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
 * I've read several books covering the topic and nothing you have written appears to conflict with my understanding. The only slight difference might be that Ludwig II was an enthusiastic supporter of Wagner, and any misgivings probably originated from his advisors rather than the king himself. Dtaw2001 15:22, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment: I'm sorry but this is a malformed nomination, created by deleting the text of the first nom--just look at the History and you'll see all those November edits. That's why there is no link to an archive: there is no archive. I'm afraid you'll have to start over. Please revert this page to this version to restore the November discussion, then follow the instructions on the FAC page for "Adding nominations". Note especially point 4, how to move the archive of the November discussion. Once you've created the new, January, version — Featured article candidates/Bayreuth Festival 2 — I suggest you paste in the comments that people have already started to make this time round. All right? If the process is unfamiliar and you'd rather someone else did it, I'm sure someone will pitch in — just ask here. Bishonen | talk 21:43, 20 January 2006 (UTC).
 * Not sure how to restore the old discussion archive. Dtaw2001 20:57, 26 January 2006 (UTC)