Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Pentecostalism/archive1
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.
The article was not promoted 18:01, 19 June 2007.
I wish to nominate this article because I believe it is a class FA article, and is a very interesting and well established look at Pentecostalism. It failed to achieve this in 2004, but 3 years on I believe it should be a Featured Article. It uses a NPOV, and I believe that the quality of the article is first class tmjsmith 21:36, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Fixes needed - the lead needs expanding to two or three paragraphs (per WP:LEAD). I also notice that there's a cleanup tag in the External links section. CloudNine 13:53, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Fixed external links - I cleaned up the External links section, and I am working on expanding the first few paragraphs tmjsmith 22:32, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I think a few more links could go - that "Some statistic" link confuses me, and I don't think it passes WP:EL anyway. CloudNine 14:55, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Fixed external links - I cleaned up the External links section, and I am working on expanding the first few paragraphs tmjsmith 22:32, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose. Practically no inline citations. Some Harvard referencing, some notes...please choose a style and stick to it (preferably footnotes). Please see WP:CITE. Lead is far too short. Not a single picture...are there no famous members of this church? Famous structures perhaps? JHMM13 18:13, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose, lead is weak, lack of inline citations. -- Phoenix2 (holla) 01:15, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Support As a contributer to the article, I believe that this is a good article. I will add a few more pictures to it tmjsmith 11.35 14 June 2007
- Images aren't the main concern here. As others have mentioned, the lead is too short and it lacks inline citations. -- Phoenix2 (holla) 00:05, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose The lead is too short. The lack of citations makes it difficult, if not impossible, to acquire Feature status at this time. Please look at other Featured Articles for a sample of the level and amount of citation that is required. The statistic section should be either summarized in prose form, or place in a separate article as a list. Copy-editing is also needed. SeleneFN 00:37, 15 June 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 candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.