Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Joe McElderry/archive1

Joe McElderry

 * Nominator(s): Hassaan19 (talk) 21:41, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured article because I believe that this is a well-written article and has a strong prospect of meeting the FA criteria. Hassaan19 (talk) 21:41, 23 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Have you consulted with User:Werldwayd about this nom, per the FAC instructions? Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 21:45, 23 January 2010 (UTC)


 * I haven't yet, I followed the instructions which led to creating this nomination. Hassaan19 (talk) 21:48, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

I will withdraw the nomination then, and suggest a peer review. Sandy Georgia (Talk) 22:26, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Edit Conflict: Oppose - sorry. I have contributed to this article and I know it is far from ready for FA status. It's little more than a stub and the neutrality of many of the sources used is questionable to say the least. The Lead section is too short. But the main problem is that it is to early in Joe McElderry's singing career, if he has one, to write a meaningful, encyclopaedic engaging article. He has released just one solo single. At the moment the subject of the article is of questionable notability. After the release of Joe's album—due much later in the year—and following incorporation of it's critical appraisal into the article, the article should  be taken to GA and peer review. There is no way this article is going to be promoted to FA in it's current form, and without further developments in McElderry's career to write about, I cannot see how it can be improved. This nomination is grossly premature. I would love to see Joe McElderry on the Main Page, but it is not going to happen this year. My God, even Elvis hasn't made it yet. Graham Colm Talk 22:43, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - Much as I love Joe McElderry and the fact I follow his work (and that he and season 2 winner Shayne Ward are the two main reasons I follow The X Factor, I think the McElderry article lacks many of the criterion for a featured article. Many additions are just fancruft, some references are questionable, edits by non-registered users are extensive and change the article frequently and are not adequately verified. For a fan, the article looks pretty extensive and quite worthwhile to browse, and me as a fan, it is such joy to discover new facets of his talent, and following leads with every new addition I meet, but clearly the article is not a good candidate for this proposal. In any case, thanks to original proposal by Hassaan19 and thanks (shukran) for Emirates 123 for inviting me to this page, me being the second biggest contributor here after MatthewWaller. I also want to note the tireless efforts of AnemoneProjectors for his enormous contribution not only here on this page but throughout Wikipedia, a diligent contribution that is truly remarkable and impressive and noteworthy werldwayd (talk) 23:21, 6 February 2014 (UTC)