Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Christmas/archive1

Christmas
Renominated, after much retooling, in hopes of ratifying this comprehensive article in time for the holiday itself. It has been dramatically improved by many elves, who internationalized its content, added much-needed religious background, and relocated or altered many (justifiably criticized) Anglo-Amer centric and other parochial items. Consider, in the holiday spirit, if you can alter and improve anything which doesn't measure up to feature status in your mind. Merry Christmas.Sfahey 02:57, 18 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Support, although the lead section could be a tad longer, and I suspect that that huge article wasn't written using just three references. Ambi 08:23, 18 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your forbearance. I woke up just now, remembered that I hadn't added the three references which I for one had used, went to put'm in, and found you guys had already noticed! I culled some other stuff from other wiki articles which are already wiki-linked.  I think many other tidbits are from others' personal experience or hearsay. Oh, and thanks for tip on the "lead". I'll get on that now. Sfahey 15:36, 18 Dec 2004 (UTC)


 * Support. I helped shoot the article down last time, but I think Sfahey and others have done a great job addressing the objections raised. It's a difficult subject to reference. Obviously a good deal of the information comes straight from up-to-date personal experience, and is the better for it--trying the dull job of extracting secular customs in different countries from books (let alone scholarly books) would simply mean getting old information. That said, the references for the historical and analytic parts could indeed be more numerous, as well as just better, but I think they'll do.--[[User:Bishonen|Bishonen (talk)]] 11:58, 18 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Thanks. see above note.Sfahey 15:36, 18 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Comment: The article now does link to "Nativity". Thanks for others' improvements since this nomination started. BTW, I annotated the "external links" section. Since only one was "mine", I was reluctant to delete either the ones which (weren't blatantly commercial but) contained ads within them, or the two which mostly just supplemented the historical info in the article itself. No problem with me, for one, if anyone wants to weed through these more critically OR wants to consider moving/footnoting/condensing the longish "Theories about the date ..." section at the end. Bishonen gave it a shot, with near-disastrous results (it led to footnotes within footnotes) and we both chose to back off that challenge. This "team effort" has been gratifying. Thanks. Sfahey 20:06, 19 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Support. This is much improved over the last version; informative, balanced and well-written. It kept my attention all the way through. Slim 14:41, Dec 18, 2004 (UTC)
 * Comment: The Christmas story bit could include a main article link for Nativity, and the Nativity article I'm sure could be massively expanded... Joe D (t) 15:22, 18 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Support Tuf-Kat 09:28, Dec 19, 2004 (UTC)
 * Support. utcursch 09:20, Dec 20, 2004 (UTC)
 * Support Giano 13:43, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Support, but I'm not sure why the "Theories regarding the origin of the date of Christmas" is at the end of the article - why not put it right after "Dates of celebration"? Just a suggestion... other than that, a great article.  And thanks for teaching me what a posada is - my host family in Mexico (while I was studying abroad there) used the term, and I just now learned what it means. --Spangineer &#8734; 22:30, Dec 20, 2004 (UTC)
 * Thanks. That detailed part seemed close to being a footnote.Sfahey 17:23, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)


 * No link to Christmahannukwanzaka?? Support.   +sj  +  07:27, 23 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Support. -- ALoan (Talk) 14:11, 23 Dec 2004 (UTC)