Volcano
I think it has gotten better than a good article. I think it should be featured! Josen 16:38, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
- Note - this was previously nominated at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Volcano/archive1 Raul654 16:49, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
- Oppose. No inline-references. Too many subsections (each with paragraph) break flow of reading. The long list of volcanoes needs to go. See also section also needs copyediting as it is too long. Still a long way to go before getting featured. - Ambuj Saxena ( talk) 17:27, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
- Conditional support - fix other things and also get more references, since there are only 2. Judgesurreal777 17:37, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
- Object, suggest peer review first:
- Usually, the first occurrence of a title in the lead is bolded.
- This article needs footnotes, preferably in the cite.php format recommended by WP:WIAFA. Simply, enclose inline citations, with WP:CITE or WP:CITE/ES information, with <ref>THE FOOTNOTE</ref>. At the bottom of the article, in a section named “References” or “Footnotes”, add <div class="references-small"><references/></div>.
- Images need proper image copyright tags and source information. Specifically, Image:Destructive plate margin.png and Image:TOMS SO2 time nov03.png need(s) proper image copyright tags.
- There are a few sections that are too short and that should be either expanded or merged.
- There are several paragraphs that are too short, which sometimes disrupts the flow of the article. These should either be expanded or merged.
- This article may be a bit list-weighty; in other words, some of the lists should be converted to prose (paragraph form).
- Those are some of the most major issues with this article. There are a few other more minor problems with this article (you may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions). Thanks, Andy t 19:18, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
- Object. Lead is a little too long, too many short sub-sections, bad flow, images are all of different sizes and the layout is bad. There are no footnotes and references. — Wackymacs 07:38, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
- Oppose I'm sorry but I have to oppose. It's a good start. The layout must be fixed and some sections must be expanded. Anonymous _anonymous_ Have a Nice Day 11:47, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
Volcano
I think it has gotten better than a good article. I think it should be featured! Josen 16:38, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
- Note - this was previously nominated at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Volcano/archive1 Raul654 16:49, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
- Oppose. No inline-references. Too many subsections (each with paragraph) break flow of reading. The long list of volcanoes needs to go. See also section also needs copyediting as it is too long. Still a long way to go before getting featured. - Ambuj Saxena ( talk) 17:27, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
- Conditional support - fix other things and also get more references, since there are only 2. Judgesurreal777 17:37, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
- Object, suggest peer review first:
- Usually, the first occurrence of a title in the lead is bolded.
- This article needs footnotes, preferably in the cite.php format recommended by WP:WIAFA. Simply, enclose inline citations, with WP:CITE or WP:CITE/ES information, with <ref>THE FOOTNOTE</ref>. At the bottom of the article, in a section named “References” or “Footnotes”, add <div class="references-small"><references/></div>.
- Images need proper image copyright tags and source information. Specifically, Image:Destructive plate margin.png and Image:TOMS SO2 time nov03.png need(s) proper image copyright tags.
- There are a few sections that are too short and that should be either expanded or merged.
- There are several paragraphs that are too short, which sometimes disrupts the flow of the article. These should either be expanded or merged.
- This article may be a bit list-weighty; in other words, some of the lists should be converted to prose (paragraph form).
- Those are some of the most major issues with this article. There are a few other more minor problems with this article (you may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions). Thanks, Andy t 19:18, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
- Object. Lead is a little too long, too many short sub-sections, bad flow, images are all of different sizes and the layout is bad. There are no footnotes and references. — Wackymacs 07:38, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
- Oppose I'm sorry but I have to oppose. It's a good start. The layout must be fixed and some sections must be expanded. Anonymous _anonymous_ Have a Nice Day 11:47, 9 June 2006 (UTC)