Wikipedia:Featured article removal candidates/Wigwag Archive 1

Wigwag edit

Listing removed because the guidelines of detailing the article's deficiencies and leaving time for them to be fixed were not followed. - Taxman ^Talk 14:10, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Poorly written, no references, bad image formatting. Not a good example. Páll ^{(Die pienk olifant)} 00:26, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Remove. I've removed some unnecessary images and improved the formatting on the remaining ones, but this is definitely not a featured article. --Danaman5 03:44, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Remove ... but. It fails Criterion 2a miserably; most sentences require editing. However, no notice was given on the talk page as required in the guidelines above. ("Before listing here, leave comments detailing the article's deficiencies on its talk page, and leave some time for them to be addressed.") It's true that a year ago, the issue of citations was raised on the talk page, but this hardly qualifies.

I wonder whether the nominator should withdraw this nomination and give the required notice, to satisfy the rules and as a matter of politeness to the main contributors. Tony 04:08, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - I concur with Tony. Obviously, this article isn't in any shape to pass FAC today, but it did pass FAC at some point, and we shouldn't punish the editors of this article for not keeping up with the rapidly changing standards on the FAC page. I say withdraw the nom, give the editors three or four weeks to patch things up, and see where we stand then. The Disco King

Abstain: for now, until Tony's points above have been addressed. Giano | talk 16:15, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]