The Book of One Thousand and One Nights
I feel this article meets the criteria as it is complete and authoritative. Philip Stevens 16:55, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
- A featured article should have "a concise
lead section that summarizes the entire topic and prepares the reader for the higher level of detail in the subsequent sections" (--
Wikipedia:What is a featured article?). The two sentence introduction in this article is insuffecient - it does not adaquently summarize this article.
Raul654 16:58, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
- Operning has been reworded.
Philip Stevens 11:54, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
- Much better. Raul654 04:44, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
- Operning has been reworded.
Philip Stevens 11:54, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
- Object. This needs more inline citations--some of the quotations still need to citations, for starters. I would also like to see the article expanded in general--coverage is pretty good, but I think that somewhat more in depth would be optimal--and in particular, I'd like to see more on what the contents of the book are--not so much what the specific stories are (there's obviously way too many to do that), but where they're from, how their told, etc. In other words, I'd like to see the second paragraph of the "Synopsis" section become a good-sized section of its own. Robth Talk 04:42, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
- Object. Agree with Robth, and I'd like to see some academic references - surely this book has been the subject of many studies?-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 21:47, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
The Book of One Thousand and One Nights
I feel this article meets the criteria as it is complete and authoritative. Philip Stevens 16:55, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
- A featured article should have "a concise
lead section that summarizes the entire topic and prepares the reader for the higher level of detail in the subsequent sections" (--
Wikipedia:What is a featured article?). The two sentence introduction in this article is insuffecient - it does not adaquently summarize this article.
Raul654 16:58, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
- Operning has been reworded.
Philip Stevens 11:54, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
- Much better. Raul654 04:44, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
- Operning has been reworded.
Philip Stevens 11:54, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
- Object. This needs more inline citations--some of the quotations still need to citations, for starters. I would also like to see the article expanded in general--coverage is pretty good, but I think that somewhat more in depth would be optimal--and in particular, I'd like to see more on what the contents of the book are--not so much what the specific stories are (there's obviously way too many to do that), but where they're from, how their told, etc. In other words, I'd like to see the second paragraph of the "Synopsis" section become a good-sized section of its own. Robth Talk 04:42, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
- Object. Agree with Robth, and I'd like to see some academic references - surely this book has been the subject of many studies?-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 21:47, 15 April 2006 (UTC)