Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Brazil/archive2

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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 00:11, 12 May 2007.

[edit] Brazil

former fac

Good article. Very interesting content and good images. João Felipe C.S 18:32, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

  • Support João Felipe C.S 18:32, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Oppose - My biggest concerns from a quick skim of the article:
  1. Two citation-needed tags in the Environment section absolutely need to be fixed before this can even be considered.
  2. Some paragraphs are very short (one or two sentences) and need to be expanded or combined.
  3. Referencing is the biggest issue. Currently there are citations, most of which still need to be properly formatted. The article is also heavily under-referenced: many entire sections lack any citations. For example, there are zero citations in the five (!) sections from History to Geography. Guy Fuchsia 02:09, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Oppose - Per above. Massive lack of footnotes. Compare to Canada or Australia which are FA class country articles. --Victor12 17:58, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Oppose Mostly because the article is almost entirely unreferenced. Also, at first glance:
    • Some style issues (incorrectly capitalized headings, unorthodox placement and formatting of "See also" within sections)
    • Some poor prose, such as "The Southern Brazil settled by German immigrants" (translated from Portuguese?), "According to the Brazilian Constitution of 1988, racism is an unbailable crime and must be met with imprisonment.This is taken very seriously" (very awkward and unacceptably informal; questionable accuracy; I'm not sure if the concept of crime inafiançável is readily understandable when translated as "unbailable [is this a word?] crime"), "The European immigration to Brazil started in the sixteenth century, the vast majority of them coming from Portugal"
    • Cumbersome lists in "Geography" section.
    • On the other hand, very nice use of images IMHO, as you mentioned.
  • The article's not…bad, but right now it does not even meet GA standards. I'd recommend seeking input from WikiProject Brazil (don't know how active it is, though) and sending it to peer review. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 00:01, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Oppose: I objected to the previous nom as well and several of the issues I raised then have still not been addressed. Copy and paste of my previous objections with revisions: "Geography", "Demography" and "Culture" are too listy and there are not enough refs, there are citation needed tags and also an inconsistent ref style. Mikker (...) 16:28, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Support: I think it is good to be a Featured Article. Many articles smaller and with less quality were featured, why this can't be? Maneco 20:31, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
No offense, but we all know that there are FA articles which probably should not be featured articles. That's why we have FA review and this should never be used to lower our standards. Yes, the FA criteria often seem crazy strict but that's how we want things to be. Pascal.Tesson 11:46, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Oppose: The article hasn't even met the requirements of Good Article. None of the problems mentioned in the previous nomination were solved. It lacks a lot of references, several fact tags, over illustrated, and it lacks a real NPOV in several issues as economy and demography, this last section largely influenciated by the typical Brazilian white-point-of-view. Alex Covarrubias 14:04, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Object Very good article but it feels pretty disorganized. Lack of citations is a big concern. I question the relevance of in-line citations for sections which are summaries of subarticles which actually have good footnotes but note that subarticles History of Brazil, Indigenous peoples of Brazil, Law of Brazil and so on are all massively undercited! Pascal.Tesson 11:54, 9 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.