Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Evidentiality/archive1

Evidentiality
(Hopefully) A good introduction to evidentiality. – ishwar  (speak)  22:52, 22 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Object, straight away there are no references. &laquo; Lord  ViD  &raquo; 08:45, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
 * hi. i'm not sure what you mean. there are quite a lot of references. – ishwar  (speak)  08:59, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
 * LordViD, you should see the Bibliography section which is full of References. — Wackymacs 09:10, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Extremely Sorry, I missed that. &laquo; Lord  ViD  &raquo; 01:52, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Shouldn't the Bibliography section be renamed References? AndyZ 15:05, 25 December 2005 (UTC)
 * i dont know. i prefer bibliography since i dont see much use in separating "references" from "further reading". nevertheless, this has been done (with help from Wackymacs). – ishwar  (speak)  19:40, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
 * merged them back together. most of the references are recommended for further reading. – ishwar  (speak)  20:05, 26 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Object. The article is quite listy, these lists need to be converted into prose and explained in detail. — Wackymacs 09:10, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
 * hi. thanks. could you be more specific as to what lists you are referring? i have put some prose in bulleted lists because i thought it would organize the presentation better. do you object to this? the list in typology section is a list in the source (although there is more explanation in the source as well). peace – ishwar  (speak)  22:49, 23 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Comment There are no pictures (although exactly what pictures there could be I do not know). Batmanand 21:55, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
 * so you dont have a suggestion for pictures? – ishwar  (speak)  00:26, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
 * No, it was a comment. Hence I have not voted either way. Batmanand 12:19, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
 * ok. thanks. – ishwar  (speak)  00:41, 29 December 2005 (UTC)