Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/United Nations Security Council Resolution 1747/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 00:11, 12 May 2007.

United Nations Security Council Resolution 1747
This article meets Wikipedia's featured criteria in my opinion. United90 22:01, 3 May 2007 (UTC)


 * has three edits to Wikipedia; nominating this article was the account's first edit. Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 02:58, 7 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Comment. I see the Current Event tag is up. I don't know if this article is stable enough. --Lenin and McCarthy |  (Complain here) 02:17, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
 * ✅ -removed the tag over the weekend. This is WAS a current event but will not be updated frequently as the resolution has passed at the Security Council already.


 * Oppose Lead is too short, section titles are too long, prose needs work (one example:"Iran says also it doesn't appreciate to be lectured to and pressured by the West and its allies, since they are not doing what they preach to others: namely, getting rid of their own weapons of mass destruction, as it is their legal obligation under the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) to do so, and which they have signed"), and the last sentence of the lead is an awkward self-reference. Quadzilla99 09:18, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
 * ✅-The lead has been expanded, titles have been shortened, finally prose has been worked out.


 * Oppose&mdash;same issues as mentioned above, plus other issues:
 * It's a current event; this is one of the instances where stability can be cited as a true problem.
 * Please see above for explanation.


 * Lead needs to be consolidated and expanded.
 * ✅-see above.


 * Formatting is off; subsections are used where section headers should be used, heading and then a subheading for one paragraph of information, etc.


 * References look good, but again, prose needs work (contractions should be removed, repetitive phrasing, and cites should be outside punctuation).


 * Sorry for this rather hasty review, but I'm on low battery :) If I have time, I'll be back with more. But please make these fixes whenever you have the time. &mdash; Deckiller 14:30, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

"... wich will be commissioned by the end 2007).[1] Iran did not follow up on this offer, mainly it says, because it was not attractive enough for him to do so. Also, it refers to previous agreements concluded by the West regarding similar objects, with the late Shah of Iran regarding Eurodif and Bushehr or with other countries like with North Korea or Libya, where agreements reached and promises made have not been kept." Tony 08:56, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Speedy withdraw recommended. Prose is a shocker; here's a bit from the lead.
 * ✅-see above for the details.

Support. All changes have been made as per your requests, gentlemen. This is our contribution to world peace given that this issue will become a matter of war and peace in the coming months. I think Wikipedia should support our endeavor.SSZ 20:56, 6 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Snowball Object. Poor article organization reflected in TOC and numerous one- and two-sentence sections.  Prose is very far from compelling; sample prose &mdash;  Furthermore, the programme is 18 years old, part of it was outside of the IAEA preview. This, by itself, has added to the worries of the IAEA and the international community. Iran says it has already allowed IAEA inspectors to access all its nuclear sites, more than any other country and voluntarily.  Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 02:56, 7 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Done. As said before, I think this article is NOW stable and should not change in the future. Simply because the resolution has passed. Please add your final touch if needed. Best, 69.116.234.208 21:05, 9 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Oppose. "Iran did not accept this offer because it was not attractive"; seems a little POVish. Prose is of poor quality throughout the article - I recommend a thorough copyedit. CloudNine 16:25, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
 * 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.