Wikipedia:Featured article review/Piccadilly Circus/archive1
- Article is no longer a featured article
Review commentary
editThe prose is not quite brilliant (2a), particularly in the Piccadilly Circus in popular culture section. The delegation of content to sub-articles makes me question whether the article is as comprehensive as it could be, especially as some of the delegation seems a bit unnecessary (2b). The references need improvement as well (inline citations perferable, while we're at upgrading references) (2c). -- tariqabjotu 00:04, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
- It needs a fair bit of work, the history section should be merged back in so should most of the other split off stubs (they are mostly duplicates of the sparse text in the article), the authors of the popular culture section are unfamiliar with paragraphs.--Peta 02:11, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
- I think it's fine - not too significantly changed from when I nominated it for FA. --JuntungWu 05:29, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
- Needs inline citations. LuciferMorgan 23:54, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
- A few images have obsolete licencing tags, they should be fixed. Jay32183 00:28, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
- Uncited, move to FARC. Sandy 03:51, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
FARC commentary
edit- Suggested FA criteria concerns are writing quality (1a), comprehensiveness (1b), and citations (1c). Marskell 08:13, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
- Remove It appears no progress has been made to add inline citations or to improve the overall writing quality. The image tags also need to be updated. Jay32183 19:30, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
- Remove. No inline citations.--Yannismarou 16:42, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
- Remove No inline citations. LuciferMorgan 08:36, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
- Remove - referencing issues.--Peta 04:35, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
- Remove as per above. Tony 12:35, 9 September 2006 (UTC) In particular, huge sentences. Tony 13:02, 9 September 2006 (UTC)