Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Animal Liberation Front/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 02:08, 1 June 2007.

[edit] Animal Liberation Front

I believe this article meets the whole criteria. It explains the subject and is non-bias, with the proper sources and quotes. Also, it has links for further investigation and a good set of pictures, logos, and personal testimonies associated with the movement. Overall, it seems a very well written and balanced NPOV article.Maziotis 16:35, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

• Comments. The lead should mention a bit about the origin, and the lead may possibly be a bit long. Filled out one citation. In the notes, some access dates are linked, some are not, and some don't have access dates. This could be more consistent. Gimmetrow 05:02, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
• More comments
  • The photos should be spaced better and more uniform in size. Also, there's too much info in some of the captions that should be incorporated into the main text.
  • Some of the wikilinks are redundant. Link only on the first use, preferably not in the captions, to avoid overlinking (e.g., Ronnie Lee, Rodin Webb, Underground Railroad, etc.)
  • Acronyms should be consistent, i.e., change "U.S." to "US"
  • Reduce the number of quotes. Technically, it doesn't seem to be POV, but it has a pro-ALF tone by extensive use of quotes. Paraphrasing would help. Maybe pull together a separate section on ALF philosophy near the beginning (including the 'extensional self-defense' paragraph)?
  • Not only access dates in the notes, but other problems there as well. Some retrieval dates are wikilinked, others aren't; note 52 is blank; 26 might as well be blank.

I didn't go through with a fine tooth comb, but some of these are basic technical issues that should be fixed up before promotion to FA that stood out immediately to me. Hope this helps, bobanny 02:49, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

• Oppose This article doesn't use references appropriately: many are missing wikilinked dates, duplicate citations in sequential sentences (only one at the end of a sequence is needed; see ref #43 for an example), and numerous paragraphs of specific information are uncited ("In 1965, the group was re-created, this time ... members lay down between the hunters and the fox.", "In August 1974, Lee and Goodman were arrested...released after serving one", "In response to the emergence of this more violent strain of protest...started to monitor activists.", etc.). Throw on top of that the unaddressed problems above and failure to follow all WP:MoS guidelines, I just do not believe this is "the best Wikipedia has to offer." — BQZip01 — ^talk 21:57, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

• Oppose
  • The lead contains too much redundancy, e.g., "removing animals from laboratories and farms" is mentioned twice.
  • The lead is too long; it should be shrunk by a factor of two. The quotes can be moved into the relevant sections.
  • Not enough context. For example, there is almost no discussion of the relationship of the ALF to historical or related groups like BUAV or PETA. Nor is the relationship between the ALF and vegetarianism discussed.
  • Way too much reporting on how the ALF sees itself, which in the end turns this into a pro-ALF article.
  • Almost no critical reporting other than the violence/damage issue. For example, evidently many people think it OK in some cases to experiment on animals, but we hear nothing of their views.
  • Many of the references have dates in a hardwired format; the dates should follow user preferences.
  • Several references contain URLs but lack access dates.
  • (Minor) One of the references is dated in the year 20404.
  • The current debate in the U.S. over ALF arsonists being sentenced under terrorist law suggests that it's better to let the dust settle on this article.

Eubulides 07:07, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

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.