Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/KaDee Strickland

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] KaDee Strickland

Self-nomination. Was on peer review here for a time, and only one objection was raised, which I felt I couldn't address without compromising the verifiability guidelines. I believe it meets the featured article criteria, as well as the standards set by other featured articles about actors and actresses on Wikipedia. Extraordinary Machine 02:49, 30 August 2005 (UTC)

  • Support. Looks good. Rather overwhelming list of references, though. --Carnildo 03:33, 30 August 2005 (UTC)
    • I think, like Mgm and Rossrs said, that it is better to err on the side of caution when it comes to references. Since there hasn't been a great deal written about her by the media, I had to look in many places to find information on her films. Extraordinary Machine 13:30, 30 August 2005 (UTC)
  • Support. I really liked the article, which is very comprehensive. Carioca 04:37, August 30, 2005 (UTC)
  • Support. I prefer comprehensive references over something "less overwhelming". They're in a small font to save as much space as possible. - Mgm|(talk) 08:51, August 30, 2005 (UTC)
  • Support - I've never even heard of her, but this is one of the strongest celebrity articles I've seen here. Well done on the image description pages and rationales. I think you justified the large number of references on peer review. Better too many, than not enough. Rossrs 10:46, 30 August 2005 (UTC)
  • Support - Great work. pamri 16:20, August 30, 2005 (UTC)
  • Support - Never heard of her, but well done all the same. Many celebrity articles (ahem) suffer from a rather fan-ish tone. This one reads as a balanced piece of research. Well done! TreveXtalk 18:00, 30 August 2005 (UTC)
  • Support - This is a superb work that needs to be acknowledged by more Wikipedia visitors. PMLF 20:46, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
  • Support - Nice to see a bit of totty on these pages! ;) (thats not my reason for support btw!!) Great article, well done, everything it should be. --PopUpPirate 23:44, August 31, 2005 (UTC)
  • Support. That's a heck of a lot of references! Good use and positioning of the pictures, good NPOV, well-written. I believe that the list of roles is not overwhelming, even if they are mostly small parts, but maybe the references section (which is almost longer than the article) needs to be cut down, or moved to something like list of references for KaDee Strickland article (joking...). Congrats on such a nice article -[[User:Mysekurity|Mysekurity]] [[additions | e-mail]] 22:56, 3 September 2005 (UTC)