Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Empress Dowager Cixi/archive1

Empress Dowager Cixi
Real head of state of China for 48 years. Is this the same Dowager Empress as the one who appears in the movie The Last Emperor? If so, you may want to include a brief mention of it. As I said, this is a marvelous article! If these problems are addressed and the article given a general copyedit, it would make a lovely addition to FA. &#39;&#39;*Exeunt*&#39;&#39; Ganymead &#91;&#91;User_talk:Ganymead&#124;&lt;sup&gt;&lt;font color=&quot;green&quot;&gt;Dialogue?&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;]] 17:10, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
 * I think she did very bad, she did lead Emperor Guangxu to reform. 20:45, 17 November 2005 (UTC) Astorknlam
 * This is a great article, though unfortunately I must object. I suggest this article should go through peer review before coming here. These items should be addressed:
 * The article is rife with a number of short and sometimes one-sentence paragraphs. These should either be either combined with other paragraphs or expanded.
 * There are a number of NPOV statements such as "...her conservative attitudes did not serve her well..." These should either be cited to specific sources or eliminated.
 * I noticed one picture only had a caption in Chinese. While the captions in Chinese and English are fine, there needs to be an English counterpart to every Chinese caption.
 * Numerous times the article refers to "recent biographies" or "recent biographers," though the references section only lists one biography. The references section should be expanded to include all works cited, plus inline citations should be used to indicate exact sources.
 * I think the Names section really should come before the Early Life sections so as to not break up her biography.
 * This article has been over-linked. Sometimes the same name is linked in the same paragraph. The important names and dates should generally only be linked once or a few times in the article.
 * The section "Crisis with Guangxu" is too short and really should either be expanded or merged with another section.
 * Object. The structure is a bit strange and difficult to follow, and some of the prose could really do with a solid reworking, particularly in the earlier parts of the article. It's certainly not bad, but really does need quite a reorganisation before being featured. Ambi 23:22, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Object Two sentences do not make a section. Expand or merge. --Jiang 05:26, 18 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Strong object. I saw this article a few weeks ago (while going through a list of biography articles that are considered "most important" to Wikipedia, of which this is one), and have been planning to do heavy revision on it as soon as possible because I was immediately very surprised by how many bizarre layout choices there were, errors in the text, etc. I'd consider putting several cleanup tags on it, not making it a Featured Article. -16:27, 18 November 2005 (UTC)