Wikipedia:Featured article review/Flea (musician)/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 on 2 August 2014 (UTC)
Flea (musician) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
| Toolbox |
|---|
- Notified: NSR77, Alternative music WikiProject
Review commentary
editI feel this article no longer meets the FA criteria mainly due to its lack of sourcing in various cases. I raised these issues on the talk page almost a month ago, and the article has seen hardly any progress since. The issues raised were:
- First off, YouTube is not a reliable source in this instance...eman17 is not a company or anything seriously relating to Flea.
- I have had to place several [citation needed] templates due to lack of sourcing.
- Many sections lack prose quality, specifically "Chili Peppers hiatus, return to school, I'm with You and Helen Burns (2008–2012)" and "Effects" should be integrated to include more prose, rather than pretty much just a list.
- Lead does not conform to WP:LEAD
Each issue continues to remain unresolved, and I feel as though articles like this give FAs—and Wikipedia for that matter—a bad name. I'm sure the article has more problems, but honestly it just bothered me to see an FA in such poor condition when I know that this would be far from FAC passing material today. Thank you for any comments, --CrowzRSA 16:10, 25 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: The article has many citation needed templates, a few unreliable sources, inconsistent reference's formatting, and is poorly organized.--Вик Ретлхед (talk) 20:16, 27 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: I personally think this is salvageable, though it is one of the many articles Wikipedia:WikiProject Red Hot Chili Peppers built up to FA status before abandoning the project. CrowzRSA, are you interested in working with me a bit to get this back into shape? I know the list you posted on the talk page probably isn't meant to be exhaustive, but if I work on fixing the basic issues are you willing to go back through it and re-review? --Spike Wilbury (talk) 13:32, 29 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: Since I can't vote now, I'll add that the section "Chili Peppers hiatus ..." consists mostly of one- or two-sentence paragraphs that go like "On such-and-such a British date 2011, such-and-such happened." No further organization. The "Musical style" section is also poorly organized; the paragraph before the first subsection is giant and ranges in content from physical technique, musical styles, other instruments, and legacy. The lists could also use some formatting or splitting-off. Tezero (talk) 06:52, 22 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Well, I won't be working on it since the nominator hasn't even respond to my questions. --Spike Wilbury (talk) 12:22, 22 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
FARC commentary
edit- Concerns raised in the review section mainly concerned sourcing and organization. Nikkimaria (talk) 13:13, 11 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Delist because no work was done to address the issues raised above.--Retrohead (talk) 21:11, 12 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Delist per Retrohead. Corvoe (speak to me) 15:15, 16 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Delist per copious unaddressed issues. Tezero (talk) 21:31, 16 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- 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) 14:39, 2 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.