Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/The Mother of All Demos/archive1

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 archived by Ian Rose via FACBot (talk) 4 December 2022 [1].

The Mother of All Demos edit

Nominator(s): MyCatIsAChonk (talk) 20:14, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about... a famous computer demonstration from 1968 for the Association for Computing Machinery / Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (ACM/IEEE). This demo featured a variety of technologies that would become essential in modern computing, like windows, computer mice, video conferencing, a collaborative real-time editing. The name "The Mother of All Demos" comes from the importance of this demo in modern computing. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) 20:14, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

Suggest adding alt text. Nikkimaria (talk) 04:54, 24 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Opppose from TAOT

I think this nomination was done in good faith, but the nominator has made exactly zero edits to the article. As it says at the top of the FAC page, "Nominators who are not significant contributors to the article should consult regular editors of the article before nominating it." I checked, and nobody asked Abebenjoe, the author of most of the article. I am strongly inclined to oppose on principle. FAC is a very difficult process, and my first nomination failed, despite me putting extensive work into the article. I encourage the nominator to withdraw and gain some experience with the Good Articles process first. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 01:51, 4 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Tks TAOT. Yes we generally remove articles with no input from the nominator as out-of-process, as much as anything for the practical reason that unless one has been involved in the development of an article one can't be expected to field all the critical commentary likely to arise during review; I'll therefore be archiving this shortly. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 18:51, 4 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Trainsandotherthings (talk) yeah, I wasn't consulted. This is usually the time of the year I take a look at the article and make corrections or add more material to it. I don't feel the article is ready to go through the process to become a Featured Article. It could be, might need a few more citations, and more copy editing. I probably don't have the time in the near-term to turn this into a Feature Article. I know some of the issues I'd like to correct, but that would require time in libraries with real books to get some answers, and I don't have the time to mine the University of Toronto library system or the City of Toronto's Research Library to develop better citations. But if someone else does that, I'm not opposed to that. Thank you for the heads up.--Abebenjoe (talk) 04:50, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Closing note: This candidate has been archived, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FAC/ar, and leave the {{featured article candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Ian Rose (talk) 18:53, 4 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.