Wikipedia:Featured article review/Jonathan Wild/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 by YellowAssessmentMonkey 01:00, 25 January 2010.

Review commentary

 * Notified: User talk:Geogre, ... Wikipedia talk:WikiProject England, ...

Promoted in October 2004, its a worthy and interesting subject but has fallen way behind current FA standards.


 * 1) Severe lack of citations, some sections are barely cited at all.
 * 2) Prose is ok, but not the standard that you'd expect at FA - for instance "By 1724, London political life was experiencing a crisis of public confidence", and "There are a few treatments of Wild that attempt to dramatize his life, but there remains only one full length non-fiction biography on Wild" - British article, and US spelling also.
 * 3) Two images lack sufficient source data. Parrot of Doom 19:03, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

Comment. Please add alt text to images; see WP:ALT. Eubulides (talk) 09:44, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

FARC commentary

 * Suggested featured article criterion concerns are citations, prose and copyright  YellowMonkey  ( bananabucket '')  05:34, 11 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Delist. I agree with the nom rationale. Unfortunately, nothing has been done to improve the article to address those above concerns, regarding current FA standards. Cirt (talk) 22:31, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Delist – As the other reviewers have said, the insufficient citations and prose issues, among other things, cause the article to fail modern FA criteria.  Giants2008  ( 27 and counting ) 04:11, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.