Wikipedia:Featured article review/Dred Scott v. Sandford/archive1


 * The following is an archived discussion of a featured article review. Please do not modify it. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page or at Wikipedia talk:Featured article review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was removed 07:49, 2 May 2007.

Review commentary

 * Messages left at TUF-KAT, Law, and U.S. Supreme Court cases. Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 18:18, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

This article was a featured in November 2004, but currently seems to be in a state of stagnation. Ustimika 13:37, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Certain sections of the article is almost void of citations
 * The lead section is not organized
 * There has been recent vandalism to the page
 * The Historical impact assessment section is lacking
 * Comment Lack of vandalism is not part of the criteria for featured article status. However, the article has very few citations; even direct quotes aren't cited. Also, as the nominator said, the "Historical impact" section needs a lot of work. Perhaps this was featured quality back in 2004, but that is certainly not the case in 2007. --  tariq abjotu  19:48, 11 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Move to FARC, nothing happening. Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 20:31, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

FARC commentary

 * Suggested FA criteria concerns are citations (1c), stability (1e), and comprehensiveness (1b). Marskell 12:31, 17 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Remove per 1c. LuciferMorgan 21:35, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Remove 1c. Quadzilla99 18:42, 26 April 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 review. No further edits should be made to this page.