Wikipedia:Featured article review/Dred Scott v. Sandford/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 removed 07:49, 2 May 2007.
Dred Scott v. Sandford edit
Review commentary edit
- Messages left at TUF-KAT, Law, and U.S. Supreme Court cases. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:18, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This article was a featured in November 2004, but currently seems to be in a state of stagnation.
- Certain sections of the article is almost void of citations
- The lead section is not organized
- There has been recent vandalism to the page
- The Historical impact assessment section is lacking
Ustimika 13:37, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Lack of vandalism is not part of the criteria for featured article status. However, the article has very few citations; even direct quotes aren't cited. Also, as the nominator said, the "Historical impact" section needs a lot of work. Perhaps this was featured quality back in 2004, but that is certainly not the case in 2007. -- tariqabjotu 19:48, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Move to FARC, nothing happening. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:31, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
FARC commentary edit
- Suggested FA criteria concerns are citations (1c), stability (1e), and comprehensiveness (1b). Marskell 12:31, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Remove per 1c. LuciferMorgan 21:35, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Remove 1c. Quadzilla99 18:42, 26 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 review. No further edits should be made to this page.