Wikipedia:Featured article review/Military career of Hugo Chávez/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 delisted by Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:33, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

Military career of Hugo Chávez

 * Notified: Saravask, WP Venezuela, WP MilHist 
 * URFA nomination
 * '''Talk page notification four years ago.

Review section
This article was a 2006 promotion, and it has remain relatively unchanged in the eight years since then. It was written before Chavez rose to "prominence", and although well written and well cited, is now out of date. Many new sources have been written since 2006. See, for example, See also the unsigned commentary at User:Dweller/Featured Articles that haven't been on Main Page. The article needs an update to comply with 1b and 1c, and potentially 1d.
 * Foreign Affairs book review
 * New York Times book review.

Sandy Georgia (Talk) 17:29, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

Move to FARC, two weeks, no action whatsoever. Sandy Georgia (Talk) 14:05, 29 December 2014 (UTC)


 * Move to FARC – Without even reading the article in detail, I noticed an obvious 1b deficiency that Dweller caught in his comments. The lead mentions a 1992 coup attempt led by Chavez, which clearly is a significant topic in his military career. The body, however, ends before the coup, giving the impression that coverage isn't meant to be provided in this article. Criterion 1b requires comprehensiveness, and I can't imagine that an article on a person's military career that overlooks a significant campaign led by that person can possibly meet this standard. Barring some type of article renaming, this issue by itself causes the article to not meet the modern FA criteria. Giants2008  ( Talk ) 19:06, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

FARC section

 * Concerns raised in the review section on comprehensiveness and scope, and reliance on older literature. DrKiernan (talk) 15:41, 4 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Delist, not comprehensive or up-to-date. -- Laser brain  (talk)  16:13, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Delist, long-standing problems and no sign of efforts to bring this back up to modern standards. BencherliteTalk 10:45, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Delist lack of comprehensiveness and out of date. No effort made to improve. Ealdgyth - Talk 14:33, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Delist – No changes since the start of the FAR and the article is still deficient. Giants2008  ( Talk ) 03:05, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:30, 22 January 2015 (UTC
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.