Wikipedia:Featured article review/Exploding whale/archive2


 * 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 kept 18:36, 9 May 2008.

Exploding whale

 * Notified User:SandyGeorgia and WikiProject Cetaceans.
 * previous FAR

The lack of sources seems to be the main concern — 18 sources seems kind of thin for an FA. Overall, I see more unsourced sentences than sourced, especially in the Taiwan section. I see a couple weasel words here and there ("fairly rare"). Furthermore, there are no sources in the "fiction and poetry" list at the end. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells•Otter chirps) 17:38, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
 * What statements specifically do you feel require sources? Christopher Parham (talk) 03:13, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
 * The sources are given in-text rather than in the notes section, aren't they? If that's inappropriate, I suppose this review is accurate, but otherwise I don't really see that this article requires demotion. Teh Rote (talk) 17:48, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Some sentences that require sources:
 * "Today, beach managers tow dead beached whales to the open sea. This is done mainly for safety reasons, as the rotting carcasses have been known to attract sharks and so become a danger to beach users."
 * "For several years, the story of the exploding whale was commonly disbelieved and thought to be an urban legend. However, it was brought to widespread public attention by popular writer Dave Barry in his Miami Herald column of May 20, 1990... Some time later the Oregon State Highway division started to receive calls from the media after a shortened version of the article was distributed on bulletin boards under the title "The Farside Comes To Life In Oregon"."

Note also that the above sentence uses vague terms like "several" and "some time". Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells•Otter chirps) 17:35, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
 * The prose could use some cleanup in places and the "In fiction and poetry" seems trivia-ish. "Overall, I see more unsourced sentences than sourced..." <- Not sure I understand this argument. Sure, there are a few statements here and there where I feel a source may be useful, but the overall level of referencing isn't bad. Other than the "In fiction..." section, little has changed in the article since the last FAR. Budding Journalist 22:42, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

TenPoundHammer, please complete the nominating instructions at the top of WP:FAR by notifying relevant WikiProjects and significant article contributors, and posting notifications back to the top of this FAR. Sandy Georgia (Talk) 00:24, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Lovely :-) I guess I'm a top editor because of cleanup work on the last FAR :-)) I don't know anything about exploding whales.  Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 17:28, 5 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment 18 sources seems kind of thin for an FA - References are not a matter of quantity, and I think this article is adequately sourced. Its a short article on a very narrow topic; frankly I was unaware that whales could explode. I cut the "references in popular culture" section, otherwise I don't really have a problem with the page. Ceoil (talk) 14:00, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
 * It's not a counting contest and given how short this article is the level of referencing is comparable to other FAs. After the cut of trivia, this practically identical to the kept version of last year. Keeping again. Marskell (talk) 18:34, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.