Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/The Satanic Bible/archive1
- 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 by Ucucha 00:37, 23 February 2012 [1].
The Satanic Bible (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
| Toolbox |
|---|
- Nominator(s): – GorillaWarfare (talk) 23:17, 12 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I started rewriting this article in late August, and have been working on it off and on since then. It was recently was promoted to a good article, and I think it meets the criteria for a featured article as well. – GorillaWarfare (talk) 23:17, 12 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, 1b and 1c. Looks to be informative and a great intro to the book, however it does not seem comprehensive or representative of the literature in the field about this book. Many, many articles have been published in scholarly journals about a) the literary themes in the book and b) the cultural and religious impact of the book. Essentially, you are missing a Themes section, and the Influence section should be vastly expanded. Recommend withdrawal to commence library research using scholarly databases. --Laser brain (talk) 19:42, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- For example this article from the Journal of Contemporary Religion covers how the book affected the spread of satanism in Britain, and some of the themes therein: doi:10.1080/13537909508580747 --Laser brain (talk) 20:22, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Thank you for the suggestion! I'll try to go back and add this. – GorillaWarfare (talk) 19:12, 19 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per User:Laser brain and suggest withdrawal (even though the nominator doesn't seem to be interested anymore). Auree ★★ 06:48, 19 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- I am still interested. I refrained from withdrawing immediately because I was hoping to get more than just one opinion. Now that I have, I withdraw the nomination. – GorillaWarfare (talk) 19:12, 19 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- I apologize for jumping to a conclusion. The article is solid, and once that info has been added this will stand a good chance. Good luck! Auree ★★ 19:23, 19 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.