Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/PlayStation 3/archive2
- 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 03:52, 21 April 2007.
PlayStation 3 edit
The Playstation 3 page is a perfect candidate for being a featured article considering all of the good effort to make it so long and detailed. It gives all of the information you need to know about the Playstation 3 and is a great central location for scattered links. Playstationdude 17:38, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose. Some places have no inline citations, others have perhaps too many (four ending a sentence). Lead not extensive enough and dwells on the 20-60gb issue too long. JHMM13 19:07, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose Per JHMM13, there are also several refs which are not formatted properly, and refs 38 and 43 are blank. Quadzilla99 19:14, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose Per JHMM13, Quadzilla99. Although I am a member of the Playstation Project, I own a PS3, and I want it to be a featured article, citations need serious improvement. Mawfive 01:01, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose- improve the intro per WP:LEAD, and tidy up references please. Thunderwing 20:34, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose I share Mawfive's sentements, but I would have to agree with his conclusion that this article needs alot of work before it can become a featured article.J.delanoy 00:37, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose- many {{fact}} tags need rectification. Also, longer is not necessarily better...--Jayron32|talk|contribs 02:32, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Object I agree that it is very imprortant, but the article is unstable; it is semi-protected as of me commenting here. Also, it's way to long, at 80 kBs. Evilclown93 20:01, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose I'm being squashed by the amount of "Citation Needed" tags... Booksworm Talk to me! 20:38, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose While it is well referenced, there are many areas where it is still missing citations. Karrmann 00:36, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose because of a poor lead; see Wii for an example of what a good lead on a video game console looks like. -Phoenix 22:52, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Strong Oppose because the PS3 should wait as an featured artical until later on, as I don't think it should be one untill it had been out for quite some time. I also agree with JHMM13, Phoenix2 and Booksworm. Mabey after it's been out for at least 6 months shall it become one. Adam Hillman 14:01, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment The Wii's only been out for a few months (actually less then the PS3) and it was a featured article. (see Phoenix's oppose) I do have to agree however, that the PS3 article needs a LOT of work before it is ready for FA. Maybe someone could look at the Wii article's intro and kind of copy it for the PS3.72.28.56.83 16:45, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose. The article is excessively long. It needs trimming; some sections could do with being separate articles. Axl 20:22, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. 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.