Wikipedia:Featured article review/Panama Canal/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 12:25, 12 July 2009.

Review commentary

 * Notified WikiProject Maritime Trades, WikiProject Central America, WikiProject Transport, User:Ian Rose, User:Mark Shaw, and User:Shanes. Nominator User:Johantheghost has not edited the article since 2006.

Unverified material and citation needed markers. External link farm. Citations not uniformally formatted, and missing publishers, access dates, etc. Images with inappropriate licenses: for example, the permission for File:Admbuilding.jpg says that we can use information on our website but it does not give permission to "use it for any purpose" as claimed by the license. At the top of the cleanup list. DrKiernan (talk) 16:43, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

FARC commentary

 * Suggested FA criteria concern are citations, images, external links and style. Also note the recent change to WP:WIAFA (1c) requiring "high-quality" sources.  YellowMonkey  ( cricket calendar poll! '') paid editing=POV 02:05, 29 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Delist, per FA criteria concerns. Cirt (talk) 09:30, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Delist. Needs citations; an MOS tune-up (why are dates linked???, as well as external links farm); prose needs a copy-edit—"Given the strategic situation of Panama and its narrow isthmus separating two great oceans,and other forms of trade links were attempted over the years."(!)—and I doubt that the article is "characterized by a thorough and representative survey of relevant literature on the topic", as required per 1c. What makes and  reliable, and  is a Wikipedia mirror! Dabomb87 (talk) 03:57, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Delist comments unaddressed. DrKiernan (talk) 10:39, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Delist. There's a large number of citation needed tags, a lot of copyrighted images without appropriate tagging, and there's quite a few relative and imprecise words used throughout: "largest and most difficult", "long and treacherous", etc. If terms like these are used, they need to be cited. As to the datelinking, there's a bot that can remove those links without too much trouble. JKBrooks85 (talk) 20:17, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.