Wikipedia:Featured article review/Zambezi/archive1

The following is an archived discussion of a featured article review. Please do not modify it. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page or at Wikipedia talk:Featured article review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was removed by Joelr31 02:44, 18 February 2009 [1].

---

Zambezi

Review commentary

Notification of all relevant parties complete: Main contributor and nominator - User talk:Worldtraveller; Wikiprojects - Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Africa, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Angola, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Malawi, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mozambique, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Zambia, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Zimbabwe, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Botswana, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Namibia, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Rivers

1(c) - currently lacks inline citations. It reads alright and i've tidied a little, though whole sections and stats are not cited. Background: it was nominated 3 years ago and has not been reviewed since. Only one main contributor, whose account has not been used in almost 2 years. Tom B (talk) 16:39, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

I do not have the resources or knowledge to update this. Agree it does not meet current FA criteria. There are multiple WP:MOS issues that need to be fixed in addition to the inline reference problem. The lead does not really summarize the article per WP:LEAD, the section headers do not all meet WP:HEAD, metric units are given without English equivalents, "&" is used where "and" is needed, the article has several bullet point lists that could be put into a table or perhaps converted to prose. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 21:51, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

FARC commentary

Suggested FA criteria concerns are citations, MOS and lead. Joelito (talk) 15:52, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

• Remove It appears no work has been done to address above concerns since the review started. Cirt (talk) 17:49, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
• Remove per my statement above Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 19:47, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
• Remove per above. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 03:16, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
• Remove Comprehensiveness, possibly cultural bias: there is a section on Exploration which focuses on Western explorers, but presumably there were native Africans living there for some centuries before then. It covers the geography of the river, but there's very little on the culture of the region. DrKiernan (talk) 11:46, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.