Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Guns N' Roses/archive2

Guns N' Roses

 * Moved new comments from archive but I haven't moved anything in the history. See previous nom --Spangineeres  (háblame)  23:44, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

Self-nomination. Article has been heavily revised since it was last considered. 26 Dec 2005


 * Support. The article is much improved now and I feel it can be a featured article. --Snkcube 21:14, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Object. Only two references and no footnotes - the article's references are not well cited in a Notes section. — Wackymacs 21:40, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Object - Lead paragraph is an example of POV at its worst. Only 2 references and 3 inline citations in the entire article - much more is needed.  Very little critical commentary for the band itself or for specific projects - if they were an influential band, much more needs to be said about how/who they influenced and what was said about them.   Numerous examples of one sentence paragraphs followed by unrelated points - the article does not flow very well, in some areas it is very disjointed. Image:Axl Rose.jpg is the only image for which even a vague attempt to comply with Fair use and Image description page has been made (although it's weak).  Every other image could possibly infringe copyright, and their use does not comply with Wikipedia policy.  Image:NewGNR.jpg is tagged "unconfirmed" with a note saying it "may be deleted within a week".   This is not acceptable, and especially not for a potential featured article. Rossrs 01:52, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Object. POV statements (specially the lead) and lack of references, as Bcrowell has pointed out. JoaoRicardotalk 07:27, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Strong Object per Bcrowell; didn't the Siegenthaler incident teach us anything? --Andrew Levine 08:40, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Obvously not; how else could an article asserting "Dinosaurs still exist today" be a successful FA candidate? (Fortunately, although it's already been noticed at one site highly critical of Wikipedia, it hasn't had much other attention.) Monicasdude 00:59, 28 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Object True sources lacking (Google some of the content!) Also sources cited quoted verbatim. --HasBeen 08:43, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Object. As much as I would like to see this article featured (I'm the proud owner of three albums and a sweater of this band), I cannot be in favour of the article as of now. First of all, where are the sources? Second of all; Image:Axl1992concert.jpg doesn't have a source or license, Image:NewGNR.jpg has an unacceptable copyright status and no source either and Image:Guns_N.jpg has no rationale for fair use. Please address the sources- and images- problems accordingly. Until then, I'm objecting. -- [[Image:Weather rain.png]] Soothing R  23:28, 29 December 2005 (UTC)