Wikipedia:Featured article review/Ido/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 by User:Marskell 13:18, 13 September 2008 [1].

Ido

Review commentary

Most of the main body is unsourced, thus against WP:WIAFA criteria #1c. D.M.N. (talk) 15:57, 15 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please notify significant contributers as well as associated wikipedia projects and post these notifications at the top of this FAR (see the instructions at WP:FAR. Thanks! --Regents Park (paddle with the ducks) 16:19, 15 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've informed Mithridates (talk · contribs), but I don't know whether to inform WikiProject Constructed languages as it's inactive, and whether to inform WikiProject Languages as it covers a huge scope of articles. D.M.N. (talk) 16:31, 15 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

SandyGeorgia is probably a better judge but it wouldn't hurt popping a note on the constructed languages and/or the languages pages. The article looks dormant and there may be some Ido lovers out there. --Regents Park (paddle with the ducks) 18:57, 15 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As a rule, notify as broadly as you can, in the hopes of snaring an editor willing to work on an article. Even inactive editors may have friends who still follow their pages. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:03, 15 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: I've informed WP:Lang and WP:CL of the FAR. D.M.N. (talk) 14:34, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What evidence is there that Image:Ido.jpg and Image:Ido Kongreso en Desau 1922.jpg are released by the copyright holder? While it is possible that Alfred Neussner is alive today and took a photograph in 1922, it seems unlikely. DrKiernan (talk) 14:09, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with the initial assessment by D.M.N. (talk · contribs). It was appropriate to bring this article to FAR - it would not likely pass through the WP:GA review process in its present state, is not up to current WP:FA standards and would certainly encounter difficulties at WP:FAC. In fact, looking through its original FAC page at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Ido/archive1 - it looks like there were several individuals that had raised objections there as well. Cirt (talk) 18:15, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

FARC commentary

Suggested FA criteria concerns is referencing (1c). Marskell (talk) 10:46, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Remove. - Per my comments above and initial assessment by D.M.N. (talk · contribs). Cirt (talk) 19:10, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Remove - 1c YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 07:38, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing happening on the article and clearly deficient in terms of referencing. Will remove now. Marskell (talk) 12:54, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.