Wikipedia:Featured article review/Alfred Hitchcock

Alfred Hitchcock

 * Article is no longer a featured article.

Really, I find it shocking that this article was ever even considered for featured status. I find it disturbing that it is on the main page...people will visit it and get the wrong idea of what we mean by "very well-written and complete". I have raised issues at the talk page; little has been done to address these. In general, the writing quality is rather poor, at about the level of C+ freshman high school English class. The article has poor organisation, coherence, and transitions between sections. It is incomplete in many regards, esp. w/ regard to film criticism and theory. It reads like a laundry list of random facts and observations. It needs a lot of work. I believe many people here are confusing length, # of edits, and some pictures and links with real quality (compare to baseball, which appears similar but is actually very well-written and organised). Unfortunately, this is another piece of evidence for the claim of the recent EB author, that articles are "edited into mediocrity". Revolver 03:47, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * I agree. it seems that a WP article will rise to a certain (maybe highschool graduate :) quality automatically, but to keep it above this level requires constant effort and vigilance. dab 14:06, 25 Nov 2004 (UTC)


 * Remove. -- ALoan (Talk) 10:58, 30 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Remove, the Hollywood section is especially horrid, it lacks references as well. -- [[User:Solitude|Solitude\talk]] 07:45, Dec 1, 2004 (UTC)
 * Remove - Taxman 13:33, Dec 1, 2004 (UTC)