Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Seton Hall University/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 18:16, 18 February 2008.

[edit] Seton Hall University

Check external links
previous FAC (22:39, 7 January 2008) Id love to know where the errors are so i can fix Rankun (talk) 10:03, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Self nomination. This is a mostly-stable(see below) WP:GA-rated article that has had a Peer Review. Wikiproject Seton hall is proud to bring The current good article Seton Hall University There was a recent shooting on campus and we ask that you ignore that while we fix it up. but that should only take a day or two, and wed love for you to look at the rest of it in the meantime. If you see something, by all means fix it if its no big thing, there are only 5 of us and we each work on 10 pages at a time. feel free to join wikiproject seton hall aswell sencirely Rankun (talk) 09:37, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

  • Comment
    • Only full dates or dates with a day and a month should be linked.
    • Some refs are missing the publisher or access date.
      • Refs 35 and 62. Epbr123 (talk) 10:14, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
        • Fixed Rankun (talk) 13:21, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
    • An image caption should only end with a full-stop if it forms a complete sentence. They should also start with a capital.
      • The images in the Main campus, Notable alumni, and Notable faculty sections. Epbr123 (talk) 10:14, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
        • Can you explain, im having problems understanding?Rankun (talk) 13:36, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
          • I've fixed them now. They should have begun with a capital letter and not ended with a fullstop. Epbr123 (talk) 15:58, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
    • Text should not be sandwiched between two adjacent images. Epbr123 (talk) 09:43, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
      • Text is squashed between two images in the Early history and Sesquicentennial sections. Epbr123 (talk) 10:14, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
        • doneRankun (talk) 10:44, 14 February 2008 (UTC) goodnight

I will be getting to it tommrow (above was me)(homework time is now)Rankun (talk) 10:23, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

  • Oppose - there are (very) short sections. --jskellj - the nice devil 12:46, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
    • Id just like to point out how horribly formed your opposition was, say which sections, and why you think by adding to them i wouldnt be violating wp:lengthI also would have appreciated CONSTRUCTIVE criticismRankun (talk) 13:03, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Oppose. There are various referencing issues: "citation needed" tags in "Modernization period" and "Athletics" sections, a few too many entire paragraphs without even one reference, and a couple of the refs are not formatted properly or are missing information (#12 and #13). I have not read the article in depth as of yet, but taking a look at the previous FAC, it seems to have improved greatly since then. It may require more time than a month between FAC nominations to improve this article to FA status, however. I'm not sure if the article is comprehensive enough for an institution that has been around for more than 150 years; the "Academics" section seems especially skimpy. Compared to Featured University articles like Texas A&M University and Cornell University, Seton Hall seems unfinished and lacking in comprehension. María (habla conmigo) 15:29, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Oppose There are several citation needed templates on the page, which is an automatic oppose from me. Overall, the article needs more citations for statements (there are several paragraphs with none whatsoever), and several of the sections are on the small side, especially academics. -- Scorpion0422 16:37, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Oppose As an editor of the article, there are a lot of areas of coverage that need to be expanded and, as far as we've come in citations, more needs to be sourced. Mystache (talk) 17:35, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
    • When did you get back?Rankun (talk) 17:45, 14 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.