Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Warez/archive1

Warez
Self-Nom (I've edited this on more than one occaision but not all content is mine.) This article has been used on several occaisions as a reference for media publications. The article is quite in depth but I know its missing stuff, I'd like to hear what objections are out there so as to get this up to snuff... If the media likes it we damn well better make sure its done right! ALKIVAR &trade; 07:19, 11 September 2005 (UTC)

=Nichalp  «Talk»=  10:03, September 11, 2005 (UTC)
 * Object – reasons
 * No images, a screenshot of a popular site or program perhaps?, a diagram depicting the bootlegging process?
 * Taken care of now.
 * Just one references. Would like more references
 * Filled in some additional references I was too lazy to add before.
 * Inline references not correctly formatted. See Bhutan for an example.
 * Is the new inline reference format correct?
 * often based in mainland China, Hong Kong, Taiwan, Thailand and Russia I would like to see a reference for these countries.
 * See the references, in particular the BSA Global Piracy Report for 2004 or 2005.
 *  ISO (in this case, an image file intended for a writable DVD). (it can also be written on a CD)
 * This is correct as written. It specifically mentions that in this case the ISO is referring to a DVD image not a CD image. CD based Vid rips are typically in VCD format or DivX which may or may not be released in a CD burnable ISO image.
 * It should be more of prose than bulletted text.
 * Working on this.
 * Sections such as legality etc are too small.
 * Working on this as well.  ALKIVAR &trade;[[Image:Radioactive.svg|18px|]] 09:41, 14 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Object – the lead needs improvement, as prose it is difficult to read. Maybe this article would benefit more from peer review? Cedars 12:56, 11 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Significant concerns about the faulty, awkward prose. POV may be a problem in parts ('Even worse,' with respect to piracy—let's stand back and just provide the fact in this instance, unless you want to specify whose interests are at issue.) Pointillistic paragraphing towards the end. Tony 14:31, 11 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Prose has been gone mostly over and condensed, cleaned up, and rewritten in sections. Do you still see problems with the prose?  ALKIVAR &trade;[[Image:Radioactive.svg|18px|]] 22:35, 14 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Object. "Common wisdom" sentences (such as the mention of China, HK, Russia as powerhouses of piracy), unsourced, sweeping POV claims ("The software piracy "scene" typically isn't profit based, most members of the warez community openly detest and campaign against those making a profit from copytheft."), poor structure and formatting (use of bold and lists) make this article unfit for FA status. Also, it is not comprehensive. Some very important topics recieve little coverage (especially, as mentionned above, "Legality"). Phil s 14:49, 11 September 2005 (UTC)
 * One, common wisdom is usually right. Two, it has been sourced now. As for the rest the listing is being worked on, but I cant think of a way to express the arguments pro and con in any clearer way than that list. And I will soon be working on the Legality section... Is there anything else you think needs work?  ALKIVAR &trade;[[Image:Radioactive.svg|18px|]] 22:35, 14 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Object. Bad style throughout. Poor grammar and phrasing, every section title is Unnecessarily Capitalized, generally hard to read. RSpeer 05:36, September 12, 2005 (UTC)
 * Grammar and phrasing has been worked on, all section capitalization is fixed as of this point in time.  ALKIVAR &trade;[[Image:Radioactive.svg|18px|]] 22:35, 14 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Sorry - though it has improved, there are still style problems that are hard to quantify. Parts of the article come across as using pretentiously inflated language. Some examples:
 * "profit-orientated" to mean "profit-oriented"
 * Excessive passive voice, like "File verification is accomplished" and "thus the need for an efficient system of handling files was apparent" (which incidentally conflicts in tense with the phrase before it, too)
 * Empty words, like in "This method also creates the facility of downloading..."
 * Confused language, like using "RAR file extension" to mean "RAR file format"
 * In your comment the same language inflation shows through, when you used "as of this point in time" to mean "now". The article isn't bad, it just isn't one of Wikipedia's best. RSpeer 00:17, 15 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Refer to peer review. Big time. I looked through the article, and it is a mess (grammar, and in some cases incomplete sentences). Some of the listed references are questionable as well. Pentawing 23:26, September 12, 2005 (UTC)
 * I went through and cleaned up much of the wording and grammar. Nevertheless, I am not sure of the accuracy or comprehensiveness of the content. My vote still stands. Pentawing 01:13, September 13, 2005 (UTC)