Wikipedia:Peer review/Scratching/archive1

Scratching
On February 23 2006, a an unknown editor modified the content of the World of Scratching section in the article on Scratching, pointing out conflicting information. The dispute seems legitimate, so the article is being submitted for peer review. Folajimi 03:20, 27 February 2006 (UTC)


 * While it's an interesting article, I don't think it's quite ready for FA status. The page needs illustrations, many more links, and in-line references to confirm the various assertions. It also suffers in places from non-neutral commentary. For example, the following line is quite out of place: this is SO wrong ,the wikipedia article on Dj Qbert states he is wrongly credited. Thanks. &mdash; RJH 16:23, 27 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Are you aware that the quote you are referring to is EXACTLY what prompted me to submit the article for review? What was the "FA status" remark about? What specifically about my submission gave you the impression that I had any interest in feature articles at all? Also, why on earth would I submit this article?


 * There are probably a half-dozen other questions along these lines that I could raise. My hope is that you will elucidate your remarks. Needless to say, I am completely nonplussed by your remarks — which has the look and feel of a Parthian shot. For the time being, I shall assume that your response, while unintentionally insulting, is well intended... Folajimi 19:10, 27 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Err, right. Per the introduction at the top, "This page ... is intended for high-quality articles that have already undergone extensive work." Given your inflamatory tone, I see no point in addressing your misplaced rancor. I have nothing further to add. Goodbye. &mdash; RJH


 * There are still those who believe that PR shouldn't just be FAC foreplay. I tend to agree. Otherwise, I think you both need to chill.
 * Peter Isotalo 14:30, 3 March 2006 (UTC)


 * LOL. ;-P &mdash; RJH 03:08, 6 March 2006 (UTC)