Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Seton Hall University/archive3
- 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 18:02, 25 October 2009 [1].
Seton Hall University edit
| Toolbox |
|---|
I am nominating this for featured article because we have been working toward FA status for nearly two years, I believe we have done enough. Rankun (talk) 19:10, 22 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Was Mystache consulted and should s/he be a co-nom? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:08, 24 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Hopefully full review coming, but under athletics, why are the sport names capitalized? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mm40 (talk • contribs) 22:50, October 22, 2009
- Fixed 149.150.237.59 (talk) 01:42, 23 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Mm40 (talk) 01:40, 24 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Link diocesan in the lead?
- Second paragraph, the link with "top" doesn't lead to a section, only a redirect.
- "…that open doors…" sounds a bit POV. If it's taken from the reference, put it in quotes.
- I think the second half of the first paragraph and the second paragraph of "Early history" need a reference. If they're covered by ref 6, just duplicate it at the ends of the paragraphs.
- "…and began to enroll more and more students each year." is redundant and can be taken out.
- Why are the fires "strange"? Take the word out.
- "In the 20th century…" is redundant because the exact year
- "…as well as several dormitory…" change to "…and several dormitory…"
- "Spanish-American" should be "Spanish–American"; note the dash
- "Perhaps one of the most pivotal events…" is POV and unprofessional.
- I'm going to stop here. I suggest withdrawal and peer review/independent copy-edit. There are a few POV phrases (such as outlined above) and the prose needs smoothing out. A few ref formatting things, though: Mm40 (talk) 01:40, 24 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Some publishers are linked while others aren't; make this consistent.
- Refs 1 and 3 say "US News and World Report" differently; one uses "and", the other uses an ampersand.
- The section name should be "References", not "Note and references".
- Refs 14 and 15 need formatting.
- For ref 23, make the access date format consistent with the rest.
- In ref 26, what does "mimeo" mean?
- Ref 29, a Myspace page, definitely isn't reliable.
- For ref 30, the publisher is the Big East, not the University.
- In ref 31, per the MoS, BIG EAST shouldn't be in ALL-CAPS even if it is on the page.
- I don't believe refs 38, 42, and 53 (NNDB) are reliable.
- Yahoo! Sports (refs 49 and 50) can surely be replaced with higher-quality sources.
- Ref 56 only leads to the website, not the article being referenced.
- Ref 57 is a self-published source, not reliable.
- Ref 61 needs a publisher.
- answers.com (ref 63) isn't reliable.
- Remove the NCAA template in the "External links" section; it doesn't mention SHU and is a bit redundant to the Big East one. Mm40 (talk) 01:40, 24 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Dabs; please check the disambiguation links identified in the toolbox. There are also several dead links that need to be fixed Dabomb87 (talk) 22:46, 23 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- dead links Jimfbleak - talk to me? 19:09, 24 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Suggest archival: the nominator last edited April 23 of this year, then came back and made the three edits nominating this article. As said above, I do not think this is ready, and there is nobody resolving issues, so I suggest archival in the interest of saving reviewers time. Mm40 (talk) 11:23, 25 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Archiving, original nominator is not responding, and significant contributor was not consulted. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:03, 25 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.