Wikipedia:Featured article review/Keratoconus/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 Casliber via FACBot (talk) 3:56, 13 April 2017 (UTC) [1].
Keratoconus edit
- Notified: User:BillC, WT:MED
Review section edit
I am nominating this featured article for review because it has not been updated with high quality sources since 2006 and thus many of the refs are old. Also a number of primary sources are used rather than high quality secondary sources. Also I just deleted a 1/3 of the article as it was little more than spam added by likely paid editors.[2] Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 18:43, 30 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- This needs to be delisted for the reasons stated. Jytdog (talk) 17:16, 8 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Transcluded this FAR to the main FAR page, so more people can see this and hopefully will repair the article. Hanif Al Husaini (talk) 15:16, 18 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@WP:FAR coordinators: This has been open for more than a year. Wondering if we should delist it now. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 16:03, 6 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
FARC section edit
- Concerns raised in the review section include sourcing and whether the article is representative of the current literature. DrKay (talk) 16:47, 6 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- Delist. A quick look shows a number of unreferenced comments still not fixed since the article was nominated for removal 18 months ago. Dudley Miles (talk) 21:52, 15 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- Delist per the above. 18 months is plenty of time for a thorough review, I believe. If the concerns raised were quick fixes... well, if that were the case, someone would have done it already. As it stands, this sits closer to "Comprehensive rewrite to account for more current sourcing/literature" than quick fixes. UltraExactZZ Said ~ Did 15:53, 5 April 2017 (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. Cas Liber (talk) 23:56, 13 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.