Wikipedia:Featured article review/Ohio Wesleyan University/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) 0:42, 26 September 2020 (UTC) [1].

---

Ohio Wesleyan University

Notified: LaSaltarella, BryanD, WP Higher education, WT Ohio

Review section

This is a 2007 promotion whose main editor has been gone from Wikipedia for ten years. In the top 10 editors, there is no one who has touched the article in more than five years, and the associated WikiProject is defunct! In addition to the points raised on talk by Skdb on August 5, the article has not been updated and relies on very old figures and data. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 07:47, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

• In addition, there are MOS:IMAGELOC issues, and choppy paragraphing. (t · c) buidhe 09:11, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
• Move to FARC, no change. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:52, 12 September 2020 (UTC)
• Move to FARC and if there is some way to fast-track delisting, it should just be done. --Laser brain (talk) 14:00, 13 September 2020 (UTC)

FARC section

Issues raised in the review section include currency and prose. Nikkimaria (talk) 14:13, 13 September 2020 (UTC)

• Delist, no engagement, no improvement. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:42, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
• Delist The lead section has exactly 1 sentence covering the history of the institution, before diving right into admission marketing - the lead does not adequately summarize the contents of the article. There are several unsourced sentences in the text, all data about admissions is fairly dated in the "Profile" subsection (2006, 2007, 2010). "OWU also has a highly respected music department." is sourced... to this website, that says nothing about a music department. The prose is not FA-level, with short paragraphs everywhere. Does not meet the FA criteria. RetiredDuke (talk) 16:39, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
• Delist. No one has shown up to take on the serious issues that'd need to be resolved for this to remain at FA level, and my post initiating the process was over a month ago, so there's been ample time. The best path forward now is to delist. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 22:30, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
• 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) 20:42, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

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