Bill Clinton
Great Article about a Great President. Deserves FAC. Mercenary2k 03:10, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
- Comment Miscellaneous facts are tagged and unencyclopedic, article doesn't conform to WP:GTL, Recommend to peer review. Sandy 12:36, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
- Refer to peer-review. Not ready for FA. Listy sections. Short lead. Insufficient inline citations. Needs work.-- Yannismarou 15:26, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
- In addition to what has been said already, sections need to be broken out into separate articles, with only a summary in the main article. Images need to be better placed to allow text to flow. Peer review would help. - Samsara ( talk • contribs) 09:16, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
- Object per Yannis. Rama's arrow 19:30, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
- Photo not sure how to link this photo yet and would like some assistance: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e2/Clintonanda_Das_Krsna_Devotee.jpg/778px-Clintonanda_Das_Krsna_Devotee.jpg PiPhD 23:30, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
- Object This article is crazy unsourced and pov. This shouldnt have been nominated. Jasper23 01:46, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
- Weak object The lead is too short, lacking citation. At my resolution the pictures seem fine and I don't really see any glaring POV problems. If the lead if fixed and more in-line citations are provided, I will consider changing my vote to "Support." Regards, Signature brendel 06:01, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
- Strongly Object This article is poorly sourced, full of politics (i.e. POV), full of factual inaccuracies, and like the man himself so complex and full of contradictions that no one can ever reliably know what is truth and what is fiction.-- Hokeman 03:11, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
- Object Try WP:GOOD Aqua fish talk 21:09, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
- Comment - It seems like a good article and could achieve FA status with a bit more work, but it needs to pass through the GA process first (indeed, it is a requirement I believe). -- Ci e lomobile minor7 ♭5 05:46, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
Bill Clinton
Great Article about a Great President. Deserves FAC. Mercenary2k 03:10, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
- Comment Miscellaneous facts are tagged and unencyclopedic, article doesn't conform to WP:GTL, Recommend to peer review. Sandy 12:36, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
- Refer to peer-review. Not ready for FA. Listy sections. Short lead. Insufficient inline citations. Needs work.-- Yannismarou 15:26, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
- In addition to what has been said already, sections need to be broken out into separate articles, with only a summary in the main article. Images need to be better placed to allow text to flow. Peer review would help. - Samsara ( talk • contribs) 09:16, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
- Object per Yannis. Rama's arrow 19:30, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
- Photo not sure how to link this photo yet and would like some assistance: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e2/Clintonanda_Das_Krsna_Devotee.jpg/778px-Clintonanda_Das_Krsna_Devotee.jpg PiPhD 23:30, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
- Object This article is crazy unsourced and pov. This shouldnt have been nominated. Jasper23 01:46, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
- Weak object The lead is too short, lacking citation. At my resolution the pictures seem fine and I don't really see any glaring POV problems. If the lead if fixed and more in-line citations are provided, I will consider changing my vote to "Support." Regards, Signature brendel 06:01, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
- Strongly Object This article is poorly sourced, full of politics (i.e. POV), full of factual inaccuracies, and like the man himself so complex and full of contradictions that no one can ever reliably know what is truth and what is fiction.-- Hokeman 03:11, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
- Object Try WP:GOOD Aqua fish talk 21:09, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
- Comment - It seems like a good article and could achieve FA status with a bit more work, but it needs to pass through the GA process first (indeed, it is a requirement I believe). -- Ci e lomobile minor7 ♭5 05:46, 8 October 2006 (UTC)