Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Oil shale


 * 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 promoted 18:14, 29 April 2008.

Oil shale
Self-nominator. Beagel (talk) 18:06, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Comments
 * What makes the following reliable sources?
 * http://www.sdnp.jo/International_Oil_Conference/rtos-A106.pdf
 * These are materials of the international oil shale conference held on 7—9 November 2006 in Amman. Only top-level oil shale experts were invited to the conference as speakers. So, the fact of delivering speech in this conference makes it reliable. Also, this is probably among the best information, which is possible to get about Chinese oil shale industry as there really lack of other reliable sources (except articles of some Chinese oil shale researchers published in the Oil Shale journal).Beagel (talk) 06:17, 19 April 2008 (UTC)


 * All links checked out fine. Ealdgyth - Talk 01:59, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I struck the resolved issues, and left the others for others to decide. Ealdgyth - Talk 14:27, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment Three links are dead per link checker. --Efe (talk) 06:46, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Dead links are fixed.Beagel (talk) 07:20, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Hi Renata, this comparison is made in the Reserves section of the article where it says there is 1.317 trillion barrels of convention oil reserves as of 01-01-2007. Hope that helps. Cheers Dexcel (talk) 10:01, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Support, issues resolved. The only small optional request remains: 2.8–3.3 trillion (2.8–3.3 x 1012) U.S. barrels of recoverable oil. - please give some sort of comparison to oil usage today or estimated remaining oil. Renata (talk) 17:39, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Support &mdash; MOJSKA   666  -  Leave a message here  14:25, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Support. Excellent article. Perhaps boost the third paragraph of the lead (currently only one sentence long) with something from the History or Environment impact sections (currently absent from lead)? --maclean 06:20, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Expanded this paragraph with environmental issues.Beagel (talk) 10:37, 26 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Support. Excellent use of summary style. You've managed to make a complex topic very accessible to the average reader. Karanacs (talk) 16:02, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.