Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Tsakhiagiin Elbegdorj/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:Ian Rose 10:01, 13 August 2013 (UTC).

Tsakhiagiin Elbegdorj

 * Nominator(s): Mongolkhun (talk) 01:04, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured article because now the article looks it may fit into Featured Article status. I contributed to last editions to tweak the text. Thank you. Mongolkhun (talk) 01:04, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Oppose, 1a, 1c, and 1d at the minimum. I'm sorry but this, in my opinion, has not been adequately prepared. It was recently rated B-class and you got some good suggestions to start with. I see there was also a peer review with no participation—I recommend opening a peer review and waiting for full participation if you want to develop a worklist. At a high level, I noticed: A lot of this is beyond simple editing, and will require being completely rewritten and re-sourced to meet even A-class or GA standards. Please close this nomination. -- Laser brain  (talk)  15:07, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
 * The writing, especially in the lead, approaches being reverential in tone. There are also quite a few common grammatical and formatting errors throughout the whole plage—it will need a thorough copyedit after content and source issues have been addressed.
 * A laudatory statement in the lead is sourced to what looks like a PR release by the Mongolian government. This is not a neutral source.
 * The sourcing in general is sub-par, without any discernible formatting strategy or compliance with WP:RS. WikiLeaks and "International Society for Individual Liberty" are cited just in the lead... these are not reliable or acceptable as used. There are innumerable other sources throughout the article that don't meet WP:RS.


 * I replaced the Wikileaks reference with news reference and removed the "International Society for Individual Liberty" citation from the lead as per Laser_brain. Mongolkhun (talk) 05:55, 10 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Oppose It's a hagiography. Could be AfDed as spam in imho  Jimfbleak -  talk to me?  15:06, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

Delegate comment -- On a quick scan I'm afraid I can only agree with the concerns expressed above re. reverential/hagiographic tone, so I'll be archiving it shortly. This needs a thorough copyedit and peer review before considering a return to FAC. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 07:40, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Ian Rose (talk) 07:41, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.