Wikipedia:Featured article review/Illmatic/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 16:09, 1 February 2007.

Review commentary

 * Messages left at Chubdub and Albums. Sandy (Talk) 22:53, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Ridiculously high volume of quotations, both inline and blocked off—in terms of word count, about 50% of the article is made up of quotations. A related problem is the poor writing quality. Liberal use of unfree images—I see 15 out of 18 that should be removed. Lead contains unique information regarding record sales. Punctured Bicycle 23:51, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Wow. I have some problems with the linkages in this article. It's a black and blue mess.  "guest appearance" is linked to List of hip hop collaborations, "masterpiece" to Magnum opus (not usable for debut album--it has to be part of a body of work!, "influential" to Seminal work for a 1994 album for a music genre that had almost a few decades on it (maybe East Coast hip hop, but all of hip hop?), "underground circuit" to Alternative hip hop (call it that if that's what it is).  "RIAA" should not be abbreviated the first time.  Repeat "producer" in this line "The origins of Illmatic lie in Nas' ties with Large Professor," since he's rather awkwardly introduced as the producer in the introduction.  The quotes are poorly used and, rather than adding information for the reader, serve mostly to disrupt the flow of the text.  This is not an article on an obscure topic, which might require simply quoting from one of the limited few texts available.  It's really got to be redone.  KP Botany 03:26, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I am also seriously concerned about a copyright violation from Wikipedia with so much material taken directly from a single source. KP Botany 03:29, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment Too many quotes (see WP:QUOTE for guidelines), footnotes aren't correctly formatted. Sandy (Talk) 10:35, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment Abuse of fair use images (fair use reduce: Image:NasIllmatic.jpg, Image:Illmaticbackcover.jpg; No fair use rationale: Image:Illmaticbackcover.jpg, Image:Nas making illmatic.jpg, Image:Illmaticcdpic.jpg, Image:Nas2.jpg, Image:Intv.jpg, Image:114000952m.jpg, Image:4908.jpg, Image:Nas worldisyo 101b.jpg, Image:COLUX64712.jpg, Image:Nashalftime.jpg, Image:Nasitainthardtotell.jpg, Image:Onelove.jpg, Image:Nastheworldisyours1.jpg, Image:Nastheworldisyours2.jpg, Image:Pic small 170.jpg; to be deleted: Image:090104.jpg). Extensive quotes from a single source, it can be considered a problem per the text section of our Fair use guideline. Lyrics sites are usually discouraged, as they break copyright. The Music videos and Singles can have their images removed, as they are used as decoration (8th point of our Fair use criteria). -- ReyBrujo 03:36, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment. Just to be clear, extensive quoting is not only problematic for copyright reasons, but it also makes the writing less compelling. "The overuse of quotations can drown out your voice and leave the reader wondering what happened to you—the writer." Overuse of block quotes is especially discouraged because readers will get bored and simply skip over them. Punctured Bicycle 09:38, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment I deleted 4 of the 6! quotes of large section of text from one short journal article, as almost entire article was directly quotes. Properly attributed, but unlikely within fair use for article not in the Public Domain.  I deleted the single cover images from the article.  Nobody working on the article has commented, which is a shame, because someone did some serious work, initially, to put together a good article.  KP Botany 20:57, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment I just removed the quotes section, I'll try to help to keep it's FA status but Chubdub is a better expert on the subject. Jaranda wat's sup 05:19, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Move to FARC, external jumps, accolades uncited (probably more cite needs in text, haven't checked). Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 02:04, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep I'll cite the accolades Chubdub 10:54, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

FARC commentary

 * Suggested FA criteria concerns are writing quality (1a) and images (3). Marskell 11:38, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Comment. Some work has been but no consensus to close early. Marskell 11:38, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Remove per Sandy's concerns. LuciferMorgan 02:36, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Remove. External jumps throughout the text, ratings and other info still uncited, incorrectly formatted footnotes; still very quote heavy with little content.  Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 16:00, 1 February 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.