Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Phi Mu Alpha Sinfonia/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 03:52, 21 April 2007.

Phi Mu Alpha Sinfonia
Well written article about a notable national fraternity with a rich history and legacy. Gives a good overview of the Fraternity's history, Object, scope, and activities, and meets Feature Article criteria in my opinion. I have contributed significantly in cleaning up this article and moving extraneous (but still important) information to appropriate sub pages. Rackabello 23:59, 17 April 2007 (UTC)


 * I hereby withdraw this article's candicicy for Feature Article. There are obvious POV and citing problems that I should have seen in front of me, but didn't in my rush to list my first newly cleaned up article. Thanks for your comments and critisism though, they will be invaluable in trying to get this article up to better standards. Rackabello 12:57, 19 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Oppose. Please see WP:CITE, WP:LEAD, and WP:WIAFA.  JHMM13  03:06, 18 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Comment How does the lead section need to be improved? Rackabello 03:57, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Oppose per the following fixes:
 * Article is WOEFULLY underreferenced. I count 2 external links, and that is it.  Consider using full inline references, or alternately paranthetical harvard style references, per WP:CITE.  Honestly, this level of referencing is miles below what is normally featurable.  I am not sure this would even pass GA.
 * The lead inadequately summarizes the article. It should introduce each section of the article with maybe a short sentance.  This is not really a full summary.  See WP:LEAD for more information.
 * The article seems well below the comprehensive level required for a FA. Listing every famous sinfonian, for example, is unneccessary, but listing NONE also violates the comprehensiveness principle.  Likewise, the chapters section does not explain anything about how a chapter is chartered, what a "colony" is, etc. etc.
 * Non encyclopedic language abounds. "sprout across the country".  Many places suffer from flowery language that strays into an overly glowing, POV, advertisement for the society.  The Alumni section is rife with this.
 * Overall, this article needs a LOT of work before featurable. I would recommend taking it to Peer Review, and possibly also GA, to get some help with this.--Jayron32| talk | contribs  05:23, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Nice start, but I also recommend a peer review and GA review from several WikiProjects to assist in the improvement. ChicagoPimp 14:57, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Oppose per the following:
 * Again, WOEFULLY underreferenced. Consider using inline references and address all fact citations in the article.
 * Expand history of fraternity to improve comprehensiveness. Consider siting specific notable instances or members.
 * Improve prose.
 * Consider inclusion of comparisons to other fraternal organizations to improve comprehensiveness and reduce POV.
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. 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.