Wikipedia:Featured article review/Art competitions at the Olympic Games/archive1

Art competitions at the Olympic Games

 * Article is still a featured article.

This is a pretty old featured article and it's simply no longer up to snuff according to current guidelines. It only has two sources and it doesn't even cite them inline in the text properly. It kind of reads more like a laundry list of various medals awarded for various competitions than a good high quality article. -- Cyde Weys 04:38, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Remove. Two sources isn't nearly good enough for an article that size. - Mgm|(talk) 12:15, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Remove As per above. Two sources? Come on! --SpacemanAfrica 18:56, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong keep - This is still a great article. Those 'two sources' are multipage in length and cover all the parts in the article well (one source is a 400 page book on exactly this topic!!). Since when has there been a requirement that we only use a whole bunch of small sources and shun the use of a smaller number of more substantial ones? The inline cite criterion was also added after this article was FAd. --mav 05:38, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Ultimately, adding more refs would not hurt (and I strongly urge that anyone familiar with the material and the references use Inline Citations), and external links would be nice - but I am inclined to agree with Daniel that its about quality of references, not quantity. Consequently, I will not defeature this article based on references, unless the references provided are unreliable (which someone would need to definitively prove, by the way).  As for the choppy prose noted by Cyde, it's  not enough by itself to warrant defeaturing.  I am not speedy keeping this article, however - if anyone can find further reason for removal, feel free to present it. --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - &lt;*&gt; 06:54, 26 February 2006 (UTC)


 * "Inline citations" are still not a requirement, unless there has been a very recent change and I missed all of the discussion. References are a requirement, but they can be by "Harvard" style or footnotes or inline notes.  Further, something like that is not enough to knock off an FA, and the people who put cookie cutters up to FA's are missing something (something really important).  Geogre 03:23, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep one of the older FAs and per mav --Jaranda wat's sup 22:32, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Remove as per nominator, and because the writing is substandard. Here's an example:
 * "When the first post-war Olympic Games were held in war ravaged Belgium, art contests were again on the programme, although they were little more than a sideshow. This was different for the 1924 Summer Olympics in Paris. The contests were taken seriously for the first time, and 193 artists submitted works. Remarkably, this figure also includes three Soviet artists, even though the Soviet Union officially did not take part in the Olympic Games, which they considered to be a "bourgeois" festival.'


 * war-ravaged
 * sideshow comment might be POV, and in any case needs to be referenced
 * Paris sentence stubby, and needs to be smoothly integrated into the surrounding sentences
 * also includes—also is redundant
 * they is a problem

Tony 08:26, 3 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep: The above paragraph is of excellent standard. Business writing is ugly, business is tedious, and apparently we're having trouble understading intensifiers, typographic variation due to nation ("programme" is British; why not pick on that, too, as "war-ravaged" and "war ravaged" are not only an Atlantic case but also a choice in emphasis), ability of authors to read and represent their works fairly, and we cannot tell when the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics can be represented as a plural with validity, and, of course, most of all, because having the prose not fit one's Procrustean style sheet is not a valid reason to object to promotion of an article, much less a valid reason to wish to strip an article of its status.  Geogre 23:24, 4 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep I agree with mav. Poppypetty 00:32, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. It's still a good one, despite the criticism. --Tone 23:10, 8 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep - it would be nice to have citations for some of the specific factual statements (for example: number of artists exhibited; that the Soviets considered the Games "bourgeois"; controversy over sales of works at Amsterdame; visitor numbers in LA) - if the two references are 400-page works, it would be nice to have page numbers. But these are only "nice to have"s not "must have"s for me. -- ALoan (Talk) 10:08, 9 March 2006 (UTC)