Wikipedia:Featured article review/Daniel Webster/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 Dana boomer 16:22, 28 July 2011 [1].

---

Daniel Webster

Review commentary

TonyJoe (talk · contribs) has not edited since 2007. Notified: Biography, US Congress, New Hampshire, Dartmouth College, United States, Presidential Elections, Politics

This article was promoted in 2006 but no longer meets the featured article criteria. Some serious problems are:

• 1a The entire legacy section needs to be in prose instead of a bullet list format.
• 1c is questionable based on the extensive list of books in the bibliography when only a handful are used for inline citations. There are cites to Lodge (1883) but no listing in the bibliography. There are cites used from other online encyclopedia's. There are entire sections and paragraphs without citations. Heavy use of JSTOR does not allow ease of verification.
• 2c needs a lot of work. There are entire sections and paragraphs without citations. This is a 1c issue. Brad (talk) 20:21, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
• MOS There are too many photos and block quotes which are creating overcrowding and text sandwiching. Articles are discouraged from having photo galleries. Photos need alt text.
• Notice posted on article talk page 25 May. Brad (talk) 00:37, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Here are a couple things I noticed as well:

1. Some minor issues with the existing inline citations
2. Some of the links need to be reviewed per here
3. The lede seems a bit lengthy IMO.

All in all though I don't think its in terrible shape and it would probably be fairly easy to get it straightened out. --Kumioko (talk) 01:35, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

FYI Tried to reduce text squeeze by moving and eliminating images (but someone is trying to return at least one). Alanscottwalker (talk) 22:21, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

FARC commentary

Featured article criteria of concern mentioned in the review section include prose, referencing and MOS compliance. Dana boomer (talk) 13:35, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

• Delist, nothing's happened. The legacy section being a list is reason enough to delist, never mind the other problems brought up by the nominator. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 23:55, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
• Delist per above. JJ98 (Talk / Contributions) 06:41, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
• Delist Other than some pic shuffling no serious effort has been put forward. Brad (talk) 21:30, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

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