Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Evolution of sex/archive1

Evolution of sex
Article tackles a difficult and complex subject in a complete and clear manner. Much work has been done since the last submission as featured article (2004). Notably, it now has a good, clear intro; links to related wikipedia articles; presents all sides of the subject; terms and concepts are wikified. I think it is of similar quality compared to what you find in highly respectable scientific journals. Seb951


 * Object. Quite interesting, but there is only one internal reference and it's an external jump. Current requirements are to use inline citations (ref/note or ref/ref system). Rlevse 15:21, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Object. Needs more references, specifically, inline citations.  Also contains a number of stubby sections, consisting of merely one (or two) very short paragraphs.  Occasionally, this is due to their being an in-depth article linked, but even then, the summary of that article could probably be given a little more depth. Fieari 15:57, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
 * comment: Reference criticism acknowledged. I'm working on it. seb951 17 feb 06
 * Object - sections need to be expanded, lead cleaned up (remove ennumeration), etc. Thanks! Flcelloguy (A note? ) 22:39, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Object. As a contributor, I'm surprised this got nominated. It's clearly not ready yet. Removing enumeration would be good, incidentally. - Samsara contrib talk 13:25, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Object. A scientific style is too sharp, also there is a lack of pics :) Brandmeister 16:13, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment. Can I remove the nomination status then? As I realise now, it is clearly not up to standards yet. I was being too optimistic and wanted to see what people though of it. seb951
 * You should instead try the Wikipedia peer review. - Samsara contrib talk 13:26, 22 February 2006 (UTC)