Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Project Apollo/archive1
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Project Apollo
Article about NASA's manned missions to the Moon in the late '60s and early '70s.
The article has huge historical relevance, contains lots of valuable content, and in my opinion is long overdue to become a featured article. I think that it meets all criteria. --GW_Simulations|User Page | Talk | Contribs | E-mail 20:59, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
- Comment - Very list heavy and table heavy, and also <ref> system is not used. Philc TECI 21:09, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
- Object lack of proper inline footnote referencing (WP:FOOTNOTE). SCHZMO ✍ 21:26, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
- I do not understand the system. If someone could explain it, I will implement it. --GW_Simulations|User Page | Talk | Contribs | E-mail 21:33, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
- see the link he left, WP:FOOTNOTE. If you have any more questions on it I'll be happy to answer them. Philc TECI 21:38, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
- Note that footnotes are not required, but references are. "Harvard citation" is just as valid, if the user is more familiar with it. Geogre 20:02, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
- see the link he left, WP:FOOTNOTE. If you have any more questions on it I'll be happy to answer them. Philc TECI 21:38, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
- Object. Prose is choppy, requires proper referencing (using Footnotes) and lists need to be converted to prose. — Wackymacs 06:03, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
- Note that footnotes are not required, but references are. One can still use parenthetical references, so long as there are references for all facts brought in from outside reading. Geogre 20:03, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
- Actually you are incorrect, all FAs must have a decent amount of footnotes, Just look at all the recent successful nominations. — Wackymacs 20:16, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
- Note that footnotes are not required, but references are. One can still use parenthetical references, so long as there are references for all facts brought in from outside reading. Geogre 20:03, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
