Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/London/archive3

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] London

previous FAC

NominatorThis article has been nominated before, but has failed. There were many reasons why this article has failed, and after a fair amount of work and some time, the article has settled down and is well written. 86.29.141.77 (talk) 18:45, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

withdraw 86.29.141.77 (talk) 19:48, 25 April 2008 (UTC)


Edit history
  • 239 MRSC
  • 200 Darqknight47
  • 194 Mercenary2k
  • 113 G-Man
  • 107 WikiWitch
Comment The nominator does not appear to be a regular contributor and is perhaps unfamiliar with the process. This article has twelve sections tagged for verification/citation, normally fatal to a FAC. Withdrawal seems the best option. I'll be leaving appropriate messages on talk pages. --ROGER DAVIES talk 19:26, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
  • Comment. What makes London notable? Ha, I'm just kidding. However, I am concerned with many of the pictures. Although some say that they are "free" and are at Wikicommons, many deal with architectural structures, which would mean that they are 2D representations of a potentially copyrighted 3D image, which cannot be justified as "free". This is according to this listing "architecture".

The following pictures fall under this problem:

1
2
3 This one was taken in 1949. I don't really believe that the person claiming to have copyright ownership does.
4 Hard to tell which architecture is copyrighted and which isn't]
5 Same as previous.
6 Potentially a copyrighted building, especially with the sign.
7 Hard to tell which buildings could be copyrighted and which aren't.
8 Unsure of the copyright of the architecture.
9 Unsure of the copyright on the bus.
10 Unsure of the copyright on the architecture of this library.
11 Unsure of the copyright on these buildings.

The rest will probably need careful scrutiny, also. Ottava Rima (talk) 19:21, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Comments The article still lacks citations in parts and it is difficult to take the nomination seriously when the nominator seemingly hasn't fully joined the project. This is a pity, London is an important article. --GrahamColmTalk 19:36, 25 April 2008 (UTC)