Wikipedia:Featured article review/P. K. van der Byl/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 Nikkimaria via FACBot (talk) 5:59, 29 February 2020 (UTC).

P. K. van der Byl

 * Notified:WikiProject Zimbabwe

Review section
I am nominating this featured article for review because this was promoted back in 2006 by a user who's long gone, and more importantly had issues brought up on the talk page back in 2016 which are still valid and were recently brought up again by SandyGeorgia. The prose seems a bit off, and more importantly on my end many of the references are improperly formatted (Meredith in particular comes to mind), lacking names and thus entailing duplicates as well as (I stand corrected on this matter after reviewing the source code more) not being templated when they should be. There are also quite a few uncited paragraphs, so altogether this struggles quite a lot with criteria 1c and 2c, not to mention the others that might pop up. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 17:49, 4 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Citation templates are not required; consistency in citation formatting is, by whatever means that is accomplished. The main issue here is uncited text; if someone is willing or able to address that, I will review other items that need correction.  Sandy Georgia  (Talk)  18:05, 4 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Fair enough on templating. Nevertheless, some of the refs are incomplete regardless; I would not know to which work "Meredith" refers were it not for the incomplete footnote #59, for example. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 18:14, 4 February 2020 (UTC)


 * Approaching the two-week mark without a single edit or response; Move to FARC. Main concern is lack of citations, MOS review also needed.  Sandy Georgia  (Talk)  04:27, 16 February 2020 (UTC)

FARC section

 * Issues raised in the review section include sourcing and prose. Nikkimaria (talk) 15:47, 22 February 2020 (UTC)

Nikkimaria (talk) 15:59, 29 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Delist. Sources include "geocities.com"; tagged for citation needed since January 2020. DrKay (talk) 15:56, 22 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Delist. Nothing happening here, and no indication anyone is willing to take it on.  Sandy Georgia  (Talk)  19:12, 22 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Delist per all, this seems like a piece of work whose work hasn't been happening. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 20:15, 22 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Delist. Besides prose concerns the refs have the following issues: "Citations needed" - tagged for a month w/no improvements; 2 geocities.com refs; apparent usage of a Wikipedia List as a ref (After being demobilised, Van der Byl studied law at Pembroke College, Cambridge ); unreliable ref used twice - "Who's Who of South Africa"; Ref #72 to ITN fails verification; Ref #57 goes to a general Google.Co.UK Books results page; a mish-mash of hugely different referencing styles; links to rhodesia.nl website, a possibly unreliable source (seems to be a partisan blog/source that hasn't been updated in 3 years); etc., etc. Even though the article has 87 references and is quite sizeable at a 176kb File size/36 kB "readable prose size", I am not certain that in its present state it would pass a WP:GAN... Shearonink (talk) 17:32, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.