Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Gulf War/archive1

Gulf War
Good Article, well written. Mercenary2k 11:02, 19 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Support A well reference, well written article. Good use of pictures and an informative structure of writing. While the article is a bit long (83kbs), I think that the infomation included justifies this. Th ε Halo Θ 11:41, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Oppose,
 * 1) Lead is not a decent summary of the article, see WP:LEAD
 * 2) Quotes should not be in italics
 * 3) TIME cover is not necessary or justified - we don't need a TIME cover to prove the event happened - which seems to be the only purpose the images is serving
 * 4) The text is flabby, there is duplication of the same information in several places, for example the coalition is described in Diplomacy/operation shield section and another section on the coaltion, isn't there a better way to present this without the duplication (mabye a table?); the health effects of DU are discussed in two separate sections.
 * 5) No reference for the cost section. Also it is unlcear who those costs apply to.
 * 6) Consequences is unreferrenced, opinions should have propper cites. Same goes for the casualties section
 * 7) I'm not sure the technology section is necessary, and may be better merged into some other part of the text
 * --Peta 13:11, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

--Mcginnly 17:05, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Mild Object A good article, but the lead could be improved (especially by summarising the end result of the conflict). The Time magazine image could also be moved to the media section.--Thud495 14:29, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Weak oppose This is a really good, thorough, well presented article, let down by a lack of spit and polish. As above, the lead needs work
 * 1) Hostilities commenced in January 1991, resulting in a decisive victory for the coalition forces, which drove Iraqi forces out of Kuwait with minimal coalition deaths. Previously in the paragraph we are told that the war started on August 2 1990 with the invasion of Kuwait. The sentence above should make it more clear that allied hostilities commenced in January 1991.
 * 2) Minimal should be thought about as well I think. Is it minimal in comparison to the Iraq forces or just a few blokes and goats died? Too woolly.
 * 3) The image Image:Tanksatdocks.jpg is a broken link.
 * 4) Could use some more inline citation (One per paragraph min?).
 * 1) Oppose, simply because of ambiguous/misleading title; an unambiguous title should be chosen that does not confuse this with the first Gulf War. 195.250.64.76 12:32, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Oppose Image:GWI DU map.gif should be svg. I can barely read the text in the current version. WP 06:16, 21 July 2006 (UTC)