Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Brian Close/archive1
A man dogged by controversy, and a life full of ups and downs. It's been on peer review, and I think it's ready for promotion. Self-nomination, jguk 19:13, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Minor Object. Good article, but the quotes should go to WikiQuote. A better close-up picture would also be nice. Jeronimo 07:20, 16 Mar 2005 (UTC)- I've moved the quotations to WikiQuote (which is quite a shame as it probably means they'll never get read, but there goes). I've already searched the web and plundered the piccis that we can claim as fair use (checking on IRC as I went), so I'm not sure I'm going to get a better fair use image - still, it's clear enough what he looks like from what we do have, jguk 20:44, 17 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Support. Jeronimo 21:54, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- I've moved the quotations to WikiQuote (which is quite a shame as it probably means they'll never get read, but there goes). I've already searched the web and plundered the piccis that we can claim as fair use (checking on IRC as I went), so I'm not sure I'm going to get a better fair use image - still, it's clear enough what he looks like from what we do have, jguk 20:44, 17 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Support Nichalp 18:45, Mar 17, 2005 (UTC)
Object: couple small things. 1) As an american who's not very familiar with cricket this article does not establish why he's important in the intro. 2) you say he was "dogged by controversy" I dont know anything about that based on the intro. 3) Some of the cricket terminology needs to be fleshed out into more basic terms for those less familiar. 4) quite a few redlinks (yes I know this is not an actionable objection) it would be appreciated if you could try to throw something up for more of those my personal standard is no more than 4 per section. Some of those should just be dab'd to the right article.Support, you worked out my objections well. At least now people unfamiliar with Brian Close will get a good idea of why he is important based on the intro. ALKIVAR™
00:48, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Thank you for your comments. (1) I've rewritten the intro (2) The revised intro now gives examples of some of the controversies (3) I've explained or altered or linked in the cricket terminology - if there's anything else you think should be explained, please let me know what it is (4) I've created a few stubs and gotten rid of the links to articles that are unlikely to be written any time soon, jguk 11:35, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Support. Very good article, with all the right boxes and sufficient references. Sports articles rarely make the front page it seems and it would help convince interested Wikipedians to see such a comprehensive article on the main page. Cricket being obscure is rubbish, its the same for baseball in the UK, in that its a sport more popular in some areas than others. Hedley 20:59, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Support - a good article on an interesting character (I should add that I have contributed to it). -- ALoan (Talk) 13:57, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)