Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Compact fluorescent lamp/archive1

Compact fluorescent lamp
I believe this article meets the critieria for Featured status, and also would inform people of a way that they can reduce their impact on the environment and save money and time. I have done minor work on this article.

I think a Peer review is needed. LordViD 17:43, 30 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Object.
 * 1) Lead section too short.
 * 2) Repeated bolding of the words CFL and compact fluorescent. Once is enough.
 * 3) Pictures are crowded together on one section of the article; spread them out.
 * 4) No references!
 * Strong object. Same as above, last section is very short, and much of the article is just lists, tables or diagrams. FAC is for articles that mainly comprise prose. Johnleemk | Talk 17:44, 30 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Object – too many subsections, short lead, too much text in lists, no references, heavily US oriented. =Nichalp   «Talk»=  04:23, 1 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Object. Too many bulleted lists make it feel like a sales brochure. And are all those graphics really necessary? The page feels cluttered. Also, I have a real problem with an article where, in the Gallery section (again, is this something really needed in an online encyclopedia article?) four pictures' spell the second word of the article "flourescent." (I suppose you could make good cookies with them, though).


 * Marks for trying but it needs work. Daniel Case 04:07, 4 December 2005 (UTC)