Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Super Bowl XXXIV/archive1

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 14:39, 30 March 2008.

Super Bowl XXXIV[edit]

Withdraw - Milk's Favorite Cookie 14:29, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Self-nomination I'm nominating this article for featured article because it clearly meets all criteria. It is well written, broad in the topic, nicely cited/referenced. It was recently promoted a GA, and after expanding the article, adding for references, and more citations, I believe it's ready for FA. Thanks, - Milk's Favorite Cookie 22:31, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Issues resolved, Ealdgyth - Talk 01:34, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

- Current ref 23 has a format issue with the title ... I think it's supposed to be Colts.com not Colts, .com?
- http://commercial-archive.com/SuperBowlCommercials/2000+super+bowl+XXXIV+commercials I'm uncomfortable with this site, as it appears to link to copyright violations.
- http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/features/superbowl/archives/34/ needs publisher information
- http://www.theredzone.org/superbowl/referees.asp needs publisher information. Also, what makes it a reliable source? The "about" page gives a page not found error.
- in the External links section, the http://www.pro-football-reference.com/ is a bald link, would be nice to be formated with a title.

See also section needs to go before the notes section.

All links checked out fine with the tool. Ealdgyth - Talk 22:44, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ok - finished with everything mentioned above. I replaced the references, and added publisher information to the missing ones. - Milk's Favorite Cookie 22:59, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose
- Incorrect dashes. Scores use –, not -.
- Poorly chosen references: Kurt Warner and the St. Louis Rams: Super Bowl XXXIV and The History of the Tennessee Titans are juvenile non-fiction books (20-odd pages long).
- Needs more references: starting lineup does not have a source; not all officials listed are covered by the NYT source; no sources for statistics or game summary
- "Overview" could probably be fleshed out into a general "Aftermath" section. Super Bowl XXXIV was largely responsible for bringing Kurt Warner and the Rams to the public eye. Warner's performance essentially made his career.
- Super Bowl XL has an entire section on "Broadcasting". Would such a section also be appropriate for this article?
- Some of the recent Super Bowl articles also have sections entitled "Gambling". This may be appropriate for this article, as well.
- Are the contents of "Commercials" all covered by ref #28?
- I advise you to follow the format of Super Bowl XLI. From a quick glance, this article seems to be fairly comprehensive, so you should follow its model when reworking this article.
- Inconsistent referencing:
  - First ref's author is "Michael Sandler". His last, not his first, name should be used in subsequent referencing.
  - You use "page", "pg." and "p.". Stick with one.
  - With multiple page numbers, use "pp.", "pages" or "pgs.".
  - What's the difference between ref #1 and ref #8? Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not love)} 00:24, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Furthermore, I don't see how this article even passed the GA criteria. The GA evaluator should have picked up on the fact that a juvenile book was used as a reference for the entire article. See [1]. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not love)} 00:32, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - Clearly not a GA yet, I have delisted it. dihydrogen monoxide (H₂O) 00:45, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Oppose per multiple criteria, particularly 1a. Also per above; failed to satisfy GA criteria and followed through to fail the relevant FA criteria. To the nominator: please have the article peer-reviewed prior to bringing it as a FAC in the future. Ncmvocalist (talk) 07:55, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is not an actionable oppose; it fails to demonstrate where the article fails WP:WIAFA and what can be done to fix it. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:37, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well ordinarily I would've added more in reply to that...but this article has been withdrawn. Probably be better to just move all this to the talk page and delete this nom? Ncmvocalist (talk) 14:40, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.