Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Maguire v SOCOG 1999/archive1


 * The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was not promoted by User:SandyGeorgia 16:39, 14 September 2008.

Maguire v SOCOG 1999

 * Nominator(s): Semibrevetrouser48white (talk)

I'm nominating this article for featured article because it has reduced the number of headings, it is referenced and have correct footnotes ... Semibrevetrouser48white (talk) 06:55, 13 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Strong oppose - one sentence lead does not meet WP:LEAD, headers do not meet WP:MSH, "categories" are all red links, text is poorly written and does not meet WP:WIAFA criterion 1a, has no image, has very few wikilinks, and is nowhere near even GA class, let alone FA. I note I just peer reviewed this and pointed out many of the same problems. Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 11:18, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Strong opposte the article fails on nearly all points, if not all. With respect, I suggest the author/nominator has a look at some of the featured articles, Flight 93, Don Bradman, Siege of Malakand, to familiarise oneself with featured articles first. I will take a crack at fixing some of the issues to get it in line with WP:MOS to help it on the way to start/B class in the mean time. SGGH speak! 15:05, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I have cleaned the article up possibly to start class. SGGH speak! 15:31, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Oppose - Was clearly not ready when it came here, for all the reasons given above. Some nice cleanup work has been performed by SGGH, which was a nice gesture. It still needs a lot more editing to have a chance at GA, though, never mind here.  Giants2008  ( 17-14 ) 18:38, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Reminder please consider the FAC instructions before responding to an untranscluded FAC; the nominator has never edited the article, and this FAC should not have been listed. Because declarations have already been entered,  I've had to transclude the FAC.  Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 15:35, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Sorry Sandy, I found this doing Peer Review maintenance (the peer review was not properly archived) and weighed in - never thought to check if it was transcluded. Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 15:52, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Oppose Poor prose, MoS breaches, poorly formatted citations, Wikilink issues; a lot of work to be done. I suggest the nominator withdraws to work on this article. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone  15:36, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Oppose an interesting topic but nowhere near jimfbleak (talk) 12:01, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.