Misplaced Pages

:Featured article review/Gospel of the Ebionites/archive1: Difference between revisions - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from[REDACTED] with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< Misplaced Pages:Featured article review Browse history interactivelyNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 15:36, 21 July 2013 editJohn Carter (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users176,670 edits starting page  Revision as of 16:09, 21 July 2013 edit undoNikkimaria (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users233,463 edits Gospel of the Ebionites: reNext edit →
Line 7: Line 7:


I am nominating this featured article for review because... as per several of the comments on the article talk page, including from the person who first nominated the article for FAR, there are a number of concerns which have been expressed, and I do not see the degree of attention to the article required to address those concerns being made that I believe would be required for this article to remain at FA status. As I can see no reason for an article to continue to be listed as an FA despite having clear at least potential problems which are not necessarily being actively addressed, I believe it is not unreasonable for the article to perhaps be removed from FA status until such time as those concerns have actually been addressed. ] (]) 15:36, 21 July 2013 (UTC) I am nominating this featured article for review because... as per several of the comments on the article talk page, including from the person who first nominated the article for FAR, there are a number of concerns which have been expressed, and I do not see the degree of attention to the article required to address those concerns being made that I believe would be required for this article to remain at FA status. As I can see no reason for an article to continue to be listed as an FA despite having clear at least potential problems which are not necessarily being actively addressed, I believe it is not unreasonable for the article to perhaps be removed from FA status until such time as those concerns have actually been addressed. ] (]) 15:36, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
:Hey John, I see that this article was only promoted last month. Usually we'd want to wait at least three months after promotion before starting an FAR, unless there are extenuating circumstances, and even if a review was begun now the article's status would not be immediately removed. ] (]) 16:09, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

Revision as of 16:09, 21 July 2013

Gospel of the Ebionites

Gospel of the Ebionites (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Toolbox
Notified: Example user, Example WikiProject

I am nominating this featured article for review because... as per several of the comments on the article talk page, including from the person who first nominated the article for FAR, there are a number of concerns which have been expressed, and I do not see the degree of attention to the article required to address those concerns being made that I believe would be required for this article to remain at FA status. As I can see no reason for an article to continue to be listed as an FA despite having clear at least potential problems which are not necessarily being actively addressed, I believe it is not unreasonable for the article to perhaps be removed from FA status until such time as those concerns have actually been addressed. John Carter (talk) 15:36, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

Hey John, I see that this article was only promoted last month. Usually we'd want to wait at least three months after promotion before starting an FAR, unless there are extenuating circumstances, and even if a review was begun now the article's status would not be immediately removed. Nikkimaria (talk) 16:09, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
Misplaced Pages:Featured article review/Gospel of the Ebionites/archive1: Difference between revisions Add topic