Wikipedia:Featured article review/Norte Chico civilization/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 delisted by Nikkimaria via FACBot (talk) 3:04, 19 March 2022 (UTC) [1].
Norte Chico civilization edit
- Notified: Marskell, Eio-cos, Parkwells, 83d40m, WikiProject Peru, WikiProject Archaeology, WikiProject Indigenous peoples of the Americas, diff for talk page notification
Review section edit
I am nominating this featured article for review because, as noted on the talk page, the article has not been updated and expanded with recent research; it is lacking in well-researched and comprehensiveness. Other issues include citing press release and wordpress blog which are not high quality RS. An entire section of the article is devoted to an academic controversy that has almost nothing to do with the civilization; that content should be moved to Norte Chico civilization discovery controversy. (t · c) buidhe 04:26, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- There are also 12 cn tags that need fixing. The lead is cited and doesn't always match the body, for example: "It is from 3100 BC onward that large-scale human settlement and communal construction become clearly apparent" is not in the body. (t · c) buidhe 12:37, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- 83d40m replied to this FAR on their user talk page. (t · c) buidhe 02:46, 13 February 2022 (UTC) They expressed concern that the article should be renamed, which upon consideration is considered under the featured article criteria since it's part of the MOS. (t · c) buidhe 13:52, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Move to FARC no substantial edits or engagement on the major content issues outlined above (t · c) buidhe 19:19, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Move to FARC, issues have not been addressed. Hog Farm Talk 19:40, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
FARC section edit
- Issues raised in the review section include comprehensiveness and sourcing. Nikkimaria (talk) 04:23, 26 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- There were some helpful edits on 3 March by Eio-cos, but the citation issues still remain with 11 citation needed tags. (t · c) buidhe 08:32, 8 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Delist - some improvements have occurred, but the article is not continuing to move in a direction that would result in FA status being kept. Hog Farm Talk 19:03, 9 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Delist per Hog Farm: the issues noted above (cn tags; problematic sources; lead issues) still remain. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 01:21, 13 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Closing note: This removal candidate has been delisted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please leave the {{featured article review}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:04, 19 March 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.