Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/ILoo/archive1

< Wikipedia:Featured article candidates
The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was not promoted by SandyGeorgia 14:29, 21 March 2011 [1].

ILoo edit

ILoo (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Toolbox
Nominator(s): Smallman12q (talk) 00:21, 9 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating this for featured article because...the topic has met GA criteria and is sufficiently well-written and sourced that it should be able to become a FA. Smallman12q (talk) 00:21, 9 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Source review

  • Use a consistent date format
  • Be consistent in whether publisher locations are included
  • All web citations need retrieval date
  • Use consistent names - for example, is the Seattle paper the "Post Intelligencer" or the "Post-Intelligencer"?
  • In general citation formatting should be more consistent
  • Authors should be listed either first name or last name first consistently
  • Newspaper articles without web links should have page numbers
  • Can you justify your use of this site?
  • Ref 24: formatting
  • Check WP:Further reading for relevant guideline on that section - you may need to transfer some entries to External links or remove them entirely. Nikkimaria (talk) 01:36, 9 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I've fixed the dates, ordered the further reading by name, and expanded the doi. If the page isn't included in the ref, then the database didn't provide me with one, as for this site, its an online version of The computer desktop encyclopedia.Smallman12q (talk) 23:36, 9 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

  • I think we can do more to pin down whether the iLoo was intended to serve as a Wi-Fi hot spot or whether it was merely going to use Wi-Fi for an internet connection. (Of course, many rock concerts and festivals are in locations without Wi-Fi, so it is hard to follow how internet connectivity was to be established.)
I'm not sure how to word this in there. Microsoft would have no problem running an adhoc lan wifi, or simply a cable...though no sources say...Smallman12q (talk) 23:38, 9 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I know I risk getting a reputation for being preoccupied with loos and wires, but to power the various computers and vacuum toilet they must have a power line, so I assumed that they would have a broadband line as well. Perhaps the design was not refined to that point, but it struck me as odd that they explicitly specified a Wi-Fi antenna and a public access computer on the exterior of the unit in their drawings without contemplating a hot spot. Racepacket (talk) 19:40, 10 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Are we sure that the official typography for Cubitt's product was the i-loo with a lower case L? The quotation has a capital L.
Fixed...should be i-Loo.
  • Perhaps add a comma after "After reading an article on the iLoo"
Fixed, and changed to "about" the loo to prevent confusion=PSmallman12q (talk)
  • Although not directly on point, the article might mention that many promotions have since occurred at rock concerts, outdoor festivals, and running events offering free internet connectivity, but they were not tightly coupled with toliets.
Feel free to add that in...though I'm not sure where.
  • The article is clear that Microsoft's iLoo never went forward, but does not say one way or the other whether the i-Loo was displayed following April 2003.
Not sure...can't find any mention of it beyond 2003.

Racepacket (talk) 19:36, 9 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Let me know if there's anything else.Smallman12q (talk) 23:36, 9 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Fascinating=PSmallman12q (talk) 23:48, 10 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Support - Racepacket (talk) 19:40, 10 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • I have just added some alt-text to the image, I don't know if you want to check it over for errors. Having read the article through several times, I can't see anything wrong with it (the article, not the idea). This should be a great candidate for the 1st April TFA. Support. Bob talk 13:42, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Unnaturally forced? How so?Smallman12q (talk) 22:53, 18 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I may be out of my expertise, but this is not an article about a web browser or a MSN enterprise. How do you justify its inclusion on either.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 23:44, 18 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The iLoo sought to bring the internet to the toilet through a browser...so I thought it relevant. Though MSN didn't release the iLoo, it did have a negative influence on the brand (as the article shows), so I thought it too was sufficiently relevant.Smallman12q (talk) 15:35, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hmmm. . .I will let other decide this issue. It is a bit outside my expertise.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 15:58, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. I am completely unconvinced by this article, the research behind it, and the quality of the writing. Some examples of the latter, and I stress examples:
  • "The following day on May 13, 2003, however, Microsoft retracted the denial the next day, stating the iLoo had been a legitimate demonstration project ..."
  • "... that was to be released in Britain for the summer music festivals, but had terminated by Microsoft executives in Redmond, Washington".
  • "Prior to the cancellation, an iLoo prototype was in the "early of construction".
  • I could go on and on and on, but the bottom line is that this is very far from the finished article and is being rushed. because of the April 1 deadline. Malleus Fatuorum 00:10, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I don't intend for it to run on April 1, I was aiming for April 30 in honor of the press release. I don't believe Wikipedia should reuse April fool's jokes, and running it on April 1st would needlessly bash Microsoft, while simultaneously discrediting the i-loo as a viable concept for Andrew Cubitt...and thus unfairly supporting Microsoft's point of view.Smallman12q (talk) 13:18, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Revisiting because I've been given to believe that the article has been copyedited since my comments above. I'm afraid though that it still doesn't cut the mustard for me. Just from the lead:
  • Is it "Internet" or "internet"?
  • "However, on May 13, another Microsoft press release stated that although the project had not been a hoax but had been cancelled because it would do little to promote the MSN brand." Doesn't make sense. What's that "although" doing there?
  • There has since been speculation as to whether the project was cancelled for fear of being sued by Andrew Cubitt ...". That's very slack. The project couldn't have been afraid of being sued.
  • "It was intended as the next in a series of successful initiatives by MSN UK which sought to introduce the internet in unusual locations, including MSN Street, MSN Park Bench and MSN Deckchair." So "MSN Street" and so on are locations?
Malleus Fatuorum 22:04, 20 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. This nomination should be withdrawn. It's very-badly written and silly errors remain; "Oh May 13, 2003, Microsoft retracted the denial". The prose is stagnant and there are many illogical sentences, which try to convey too many ideas at once. It desperately needs a thorough going over by an experienced editor.Sorry. Graham Colm (talk) 11:28, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A quick look turns up basic grammatical errors, such as: and what would be happen if the keyboard was urinated upon. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:27, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]


The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/ILoo/archive1&oldid=1078801299"