Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Norman Wisdom/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 not promoted by SandyGeorgia 22:31, 10 October 2010 [1].
Norman Wisdom (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
| Toolbox |
|---|
I am nominating this for featured article because... I feel that he should be featured as Sir Norman Wisdom, was a legend in his own right —Dweeby123 (talk) 15:11, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I think this nominator, although probably well meaning, has misunderstood the criteria for featured article. The actual article isn't too bad, but I don't feel it's quite there yet. There are quite a few "citation needed" templates and other problems. Lack of references to his autobiography suggest it's probably not going to meet the "comprehensive" criteria. Perhaps with a little bit of tidying, it could be tried for GA, but it's probably not FA material yet. Bob talk 15:46, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Having said, that, it's probably as good as the FA pages about Austin Nichols, Jake Gyllenhaal and Steve Dodd, so I don't really know. Bob talk 15:55, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment—the link to drummer boy leads to a dab page, and the external links to http://www.woodenspoon.com/3_346.php, http://www.findmypast.com/BirthsMarriagesDeaths.jsp, http://www.normanwisdom.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=53:norman-alive-and-well&catid=1:latest-news&Itemid=84, and http://www.newsoftheworld.co.uk/1908_norman.shtml are dead. Ucucha 18:35, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Note-the nominator of this article, Dweeby123, appears to have been blocked from editing. Bob talk 19:50, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose: apart from the above awkward fact (if true), this article is nothing like featured standard. It has not had any kind of review, and might be considered a reasonable first shot at the subject. It's probably worth the B which it has and with some significant work it could be a worthy GA. The main issues:-
- There is no critical assesment of Wisdom's career. It's basically a list of shows and tributes.
- Lots of uncited statements. One citation tag in place, could be many more.
- Ridiculously overlinked, inc. everyday terms such as "waiter", "telephone operator" – and a redlink on "errand boy"
- Should be in British English but includes various Americanisms, e.g. "grocery store" and "movie"
- Structured with far too many short sections, some of only a single line. Likewise, many of the paragraphs are very short, sometimes single sentence.
- General fanmag rather than encyclopedic tone.
- Why are there two infoboxes?
That's probably enough. It should be withdrawn; perhaps an unblocked editor will be able to knock it into shape. Brianboulton (talk) 21:02, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.