Wikipedia:Featured article review/Anarky/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 delisted by Nikkimaria via FACBot (talk) 4:30, 19 October 2024 (UTC) [1].
- Notified: WikiProject United States, WikiProject Comics, WikiProject Anarchism, WikiProject Science Fiction, Cast, WikiProject Fictional characters
Review section
editI am nominating this featured article for review because...This old FA has a sourcing and other type of issues. It appears to be using like too many primary sources of low quality (like Newsrama), dead sources like ref 12, too many Valnet sources like Comicbook.com, plenty of blogs, and plenty of unreliable sources such as Gameranx. The examples of possibly low-quality sources (I did not mention primary sources or comicbook.com) are refs. 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 15, 23, 32, 36, and 37. 42, 44? , 45? 95, 102, 103? 114, 120, 126 (a huge ass quote), 127, 139, 140, 141, 142, and 143. There are too many inconsistent usages of citation, such as websites, authors, and dates; some are poorly cited, and there are irrelevant quote boxes. The ref bomb is also ridiculous at reception; some of the content isn't really what you call "reception" or critic opinions, and it is just almost entirely filled with developers' quotes. đBoneless Pizza!đ (đ) 04:40, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Anyone interested in tidying this article up might also want to have a look at Batman: Anarky, which is currently at GAR. -- asilvering (talk) 07:03, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Move to FARC no edits to address concerns. Z1720 (talk) 00:48, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
FARC section
edit- Issues raised in the review section include sourcing and formatting. Nikkimaria (talk) 17:36, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Delist Still no edits to address concerns. Z1720 (talk) 22:26, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Delist Clearly a long way off FA criteria for high-quality reliable sources. --Grnrchst (talk) 08:42, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Closing note: This removal candidate has been delisted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please leave the {{featured article review}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Nikkimaria (talk) 14:30, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.