Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Papal conclave, 2005/archive2

Papal conclave, 2005
The main objection to this FAC last time was the "unstable-ness" it had prior to the conclusion of the election. Now that it is over, this is still a high quality article and deserves FA Status. SVera1NY 21:44, 13 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Comment the record of the previous FAC is here Featured article candidates/Papal conclave, 2005/archive1. –Joke 22:00, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Object Needs several improvements
 * More historical context. Why was there a conclave in the first place? The article never mentions it is because of JPII's death. Moreover, what is the significance of the election in this history of the Catholic church? Most observers – from what I understand, I'm no expert – seem to think of the election as a validation of a more conservative turn in the church that began with JPII. What do the commentators say? Why did this happen? What are the ramifications for the church?
 * Fixed -- more reasons why the election began etc... SVera1NY 03:50, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
 * More fluid prose (i.e. the organization sometimes seems haphazard, the "groupings of countries by number of electors" list seems to come out of nowhere, course of balloting has no text under the header, some paragraphs are very short, the "vote counts" section is three sentences...)
 * The "first day" subsection is a bulleted list. This is bad style.
 * Fixed SVera1NY 03:50, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
 * No references.
 * –Joke 22:07, 13 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Object- Per Joke. Make certain that when references are used, to use inline citations.  Note that External Links and "See Also" sections do not constitute references, although it mhttp://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Papal_conclave%2C_2005&action=edit&section=1ay be the case that items currently in those sections could be used as references.  Just make sure to cite them in the body of the text.  I'm also concerned that the lead might be slightly too long for the size of the article. See: WP:LEAD Fieari 23:45, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Oppose for all above reasons. Additionally, the "The Cardinal Electors" sections looks absolutely awful. Circeus 12:00, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment Agree that "The Cadinal Electors" section is laid out poorly.  On my screen, which is a larger-sized monitor, some of the text is squeezed into an area about 1 1/2 inches wide in the center of the screen between the two tables.  If you wish to use both tables, it might be better to put both tables on the same side atop one another.  That way, the text flows nicely on one side instead of being compacted randomly in the center. --Ataricodfish 19:58, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Margin is necessary too. Circeus 20:44, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Object - needs refs. Flcelloguy (A note? ) 23:03, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Object: The images Image:Sede vacante.jpg, Image:Papalconclaveurn.jpg, and Image:Ombrellino-keys.jpg have no copyright information. --Carnildo 00:55, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Object as no references. --Ter e nce Ong 09:08, 21 February 2006 (UTC)