Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Gettysburg Address

Gettysburg Address
(self-nom) After completing two cycles of Peer Review and incorporating those improvements into the current version of the Gettysburg Address article, we the (recent major) editors and caretakers of this Wikipedia entry do hereby nominate this article for Featured Article status. Bart 19:56, 22 December 2005 (UTC) As the other recent major editor, I second the nomination, and thank Bart for his hard work on the article! Kaisershatner 20:43, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Support. Thorough and states references and stable. One thing that bugs me though are the bullets with fragments that appear at the bottom of several sections with external links. AndyZ 21:30, 22 December 2005 (UTC) (Bullets removed) Kaisershatner 15:42, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Support -- ALoan (Talk) 00:24, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Support Excellent article. --Revolución (talk) 03:50, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Object, but very fixable -- great article! Image:Gbaddressclip.jpg squishes up the text in an ugly way. Needs a copyedit (I did a little bit) -- look out for lots of passive voice and starting sentences with "there is" or "there are".  The "The Gettysburg Address in popular culture" section should be in prose, not bullet points and ought to have some sort of organization beyond a list. Tuf-Kat 05:04, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
 * I resized the image (there was no need for it to be that big). I'm not going to have time to copyedit in the next few days. -- ALoan (Talk) 13:06, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the contribution. I further edited the pop culture section inline with your suggestions.Kaisershatner 15:49, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Thanks, support Tuf-Kat 17:45, 23 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Support Object until all external links are in the external links section&mdash;the "Lincoln urban legends debunked", "Link to readings of the Gettysburg Address" and "PowerPoint version of the Gettysburg Address" need to appear not in the body of the article, but in external links. Very nice otherwise. --Spangineeres (háblame)  18:02, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
 * It may help to change the section title from "External references" to "References" and create a separate "External links" section. --Spangineeres (háblame)  18:06, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
 * I took care of this, hope that clears up your objection. Kaisershatner 19:34, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the contribution. I moved the humorous PowerPoint link to External links, as you suggested. Bart 21:39, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Looks better. Changing vote. --Spangineeres  (háblame)  14:21, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Support. I am especially impressed by the extensive footnoting, which looks more like a professional paper than Wikipedia. — DLJessup (talk) 19:57, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Weak object: external link formatting needs some work Masterdebater 17:39, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Could you be more specific about what part of the formatting you find objectionable? Kaisershatner 04:08, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

'''PLEASE NOTE: On December 27, 2005, on the authority of Wikipedia administrator and bureaucrat User:Raul654, this article became a Featured article. '''