Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Liviu Librescu/archive1

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 23:46, 23 February 2008.

[edit] Liviu Librescu

Check external links

Appears to meet the criteria. An excellent companion article to Virginia Tech massacre. Per the discussion at Talk: Virginia Tech massacre#TFA_Proposed_Blurb, some editors feel strongly that promoting this article to featured article status would be a fitting way to feature the incident on its upcoming anniversary. Sfmammamia (talk) 16:58, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

  • Comment
    • External links only belong in the extrenal links section.
      • I removed several, I think this is done but would appreciate a second check. --Sfmammamia (talk) 00:36, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
    • An image caption should only end with a full-stop if it forms a complete sentence.
    • Web references need the author, publisher, publishing date and access date. Epbr123 (talk) 17:09, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Comment WP:NFCC concern: Oppose Multiple concerns:
    • NFCC#3A: Why are two fair-use images of Librescu being used? ЭLСОВВОLД talk 20:09, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
    • More concerns:
      • Grammar: number agreements (e.g. “his family … were”) and punctuation (e.g. “September 1, 1985 until …”, “Merrey said that”, “his son Arieh contacted”, “On April 18, 2007 U.S. President George Bush”, etc).
        • Done. Because there is more than one son, the name is essential and therefore should not be set off by commas, otherwise these specific problems are fixed. --Sfmammamia (talk) 00:36, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
      • Prose: Consecutive sentences begin with “Speaking to” and prose not appropriate for an encyclopedia (e.g. “This is a partial list”)
      • Weasel word: “some sources”
      • Inconsistently referenced as “Librescu” and “Liviu”
      • Obvious writing: “he was fired from his job” (as opposed to being fired from a hobby?), “invited keynote lecture there”, etc.
      • Inline citations should be placed after closest punctionation.
      • Summary style: Do we need to know the number of the room in which he taught? Does listing esoteric fields of research meaningfully enhanced our knowledge of the man?
      • Peacock word: “became an accomplished scientist” - elaborate on accomplished?
        • Removed that phrase -- it didn't fit the chronology where it was placed, anyway. --Sfmammamia (talk) 18:08, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
      • A smuggled research manuscript”; why did it have to be smuggled; what was so profound as to draw the international attention?
      • Per Nishkid64, no elaboration on work, publications, etc. as an academic. ЭLСОВВОLД talk 16:07, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
I fixed "his family...were" but wasn't clear on the date punctuation problem. Fixed "Speaking to," but not "partial list" problem. Also fixed "some sources," but it needs expert attention; inconsistent references all changed to Librescu. Didn't get to much else. --aciel (talk) 17:41, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
Commas follow full dates (e.g. "September 1, 1985 until" should be "September 1, 1985, until") and offset parenthetical phrases (e.g. "his son Arieh contacted" should be "his son, Arieh, contacted"). ЭLСОВВОLД talk 17:55, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
As noted above, because there are two sons, the name is essential and should not be set off by commas. Otherwise, I believe these are fixed. --Sfmammamia (talk) 00:36, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
Please read Comma (punctuation). Your comment makes no sense; grammar knows nothing of "importance". ЭLСОВВОLД talk 01:15, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
From Comma (punctuation):"Information that is unnecessary to the meaning of the sentence is commonly set off and enclosed by commas. If the information is necessary, no commas should be used." Because the Librescu had more than one son, the identity of "his son" is not clear without the name, thus the name is not set off by commas. --Sfmammamia (talk) 01:22, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
This is partially my own fault for pointing you to an unreliable source (WP). You’re misinterpreting “important”, which refers to the grammatical function, not the actual person. To clarify, read the sentence as “his son NOUN contacted”. The actual “important” part is “his” (Librescu). ЭLСОВВОLД talk 14:59, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
Sorry, but I believe every other style reference, including AP Style and Chicago, says the same thing. In situations where there is more than one offspring or sibling who could be the subject of the sentence, the name is considered essential (not "important"; essential is the grammatical reference) and is not set off by commas. --Sfmammamia (talk) 17:12, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

(undent) Semantics. Can you provide published examples from respected authors not employing these commas? I'll strike if there's precedent, but it would be news to me. ЭLСОВВОLД talk 17:19, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Always happy to oblige: From the AP Stylebook, entry on essential and nonessential phrases, illustration of correct usage: "They ate dinner with their daughter Julie and her husband, David." (usage is correct when there is more than one daughter). From Chicago Manual of Style, 14th Ed: 5.50, page 171: "If the appositive has a restrictive function, it is not set off by commas: My son Michael was the first one to reply." (usage is correct when there is more than one son). --Sfmammamia (talk) 20:00, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
Well, I was hoping for "real world" examples (i.e. not grammar instructions), but I'll cede to the native English speaker. ЭLСОВВОLД talk 01:38, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Strong Support — Complete, insightful, and easy to understand, there's only a few minor stylistic things to clean up, and this article will definitely be worthy of featured status. I have no problem giving my support right now, since the comments above have no bearing on the content itself, and I'm sure they'll be fixed with due haste. Fantastic work! JKBrooks85 (talk) 20:31, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Oppose Librescu's fields of research are listed, but nothing about his work in these fields is detailed. As this is an article about an academic, his research and published work should be thoroughly covered. Nishkid64 (talk) 20:48, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Support. Well cited. Basketball110 vandalise me 15:57, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Oppose Per WP:PROF, which it is my understanding that the notability requirement for this article is based on, it does not appear that Librescu meets any of the criteria. His notability is actually based on the fact that he was a victim of the Virginia Tech Massacre, not his academic accomplishments. If there is significant work done on his academic credentials, with LOTS more detail, I might change my position. Rooot (talk) 17:45, 18 February 2008 (UTC
  • Oppose. I think getting the commendation from the Romanian government probably makes him notable enough for inclusion even if he would fail WP:PROF, but the article goes into no detail at all about his academic career, so the article still fails on comprehensiveness grounds. Indrian (talk) 21:18, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Closing notes With ten days at FAC, the article has failed to gain significant Support. Contacting editors knowledgeable on the topic, or submitting to peer review or WP:GAC may help prepare the article for re-approaching FAC. Good luck! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:42, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.