kidzsearch.com > wiki   Explore:images videos games  

KidzSearch Encyclopedia:Proposed article demotion/Archive 1




KidzSearch Safe Wikipedia for Kids.
Jump to: navigation, search

Articles with size issues

The following articles do not meet the current, or former size requirements for very good articles. The nine articles are listed in order of size, and an approximate size is listed. To see exact sizes, check the revision history of User:Thamusemeantfan/VGATest.--Thamusemeantfan (talk) 05:26, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Japanese tea ceremony (change · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)
(3.2 kb) - demoted to regular status
    • Supprt demotion - Too short and no references. --Gwib -(talk)- 06:32, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
    • Support demotion to regular status -as per Gwib. Razorflame 20:22, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
    • Support demotion per above. --Thamusemeantfan (talk) 15:02, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
    • Support demotion. I was about to list this as being unsourced, it is already marked with the "sources needed" template--Bärliner 14:16, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
    • Demote to regular status because it is unreferenced and thus doesn't meet GA criteria. · Tygrrr... 15:24, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
Tropical Storm Lee (2005) (change · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)
(3.2 kb) - demoted to regular status
    • Supprt demotion - Too short, could also use more references since many facts are stated in it. --Gwib -(talk)- 06:32, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
    • Support demotion to regular status -as per Gwib. Razorflame 20:22, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
    • Support demotion per above. --Thamusemeantfan (talk) 15:02, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
    • Support demotion per above. --Cethegus (talk) 07:00, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
    • Demote to regular status. Doesn't meet size requirement for GAs (only 3,259 bytes). · Tygrrr... 15:28, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
Proxy server (change · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)
(3.3 kb) - demoted to regular status
    • Support demotion - Too short
    • Support demotion to regular Status -as per nom vote. The article would still be a good GA, although there would still need to be a little bit of information added to it in order to make it 3.5kbs. Razorflame 20:22, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
    • Support demotion per above. --Thamusemeantfan (talk) 15:02, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
    • Demote to regular status. Doesn't meet size requirement for GAs (only 3,331 bytes). · Tygrrr... 15:31, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
Hurricane Vince (2005) (change · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)
(3.3 kb) - demoted to regular status
    • Support demotion - Again too short, sentences like "It is the farthest northeast a tropical cyclone had ever developed in the Atlantic" need proving. --Gwib -(talk)- 06:32, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
    • Support demotion to regular status -as per Gwib. Razorflame 20:22, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
    • Support demotion per above. --Thamusemeantfan (talk) 15:02, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
    • Support demotion per above. --Cethegus (talk) 07:00, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
    • Demote to regular status. Doesn't meet size requirement for GAs (only 3,292 bytes). · Tygrrr... 15:34, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
Little Red Riding Hood (change · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)
(3.5 kb) - demoted to good article status
    • Support demotion - Too short, could use more adaptations of the story, there are hundreds. --Gwib -(talk)- 06:32, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
    • Support demotion to GA -as per Gwib. Razorflame 20:22, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
    • Support demotion per above. --Thamusemeantfan (talk) 15:02, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
    • Demote to GA status. · Tygrrr... 15:38, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District (change · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)
(3.6 kb) - demoted to good article status
    • Support demotion - Short and could use more "Other Websites" for such a controversial topic. --Gwib -(talk)- 06:32, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
    • Support demotion to GA -as per Tygrrr. Razorflame 20:22, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
    • Support demotion per above. --Thamusemeantfan (talk) 15:02, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
    • Demote to GA status. · Tygrrr... 15:38, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
Chopstick (change · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)
(3.7 kb) - demoted to good article status
    • Support demotion - Needs more references. --Gwib -(talk)- 06:32, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
    • Support demotion to GA -as per Tygrrr. Razorflame 20:22, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
    • Support demotion per above. --Thamusemeantfan (talk) 15:02, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
    • Demote to GA status. · Tygrrr... 15:38, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
Caffeine (change · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)
(4.5 kb) - demoted to good article status
    • Support demotion - No "Other Websites". --Gwib -(talk)- 06:32, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
    • Support demotion -It has Other websites now, which makes me want to oppose its demotion, but I cannot, because it is 500 bytes under the size requirement. Razorflame 20:22, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
    • Demote to GA -This article meets GA status requirements, so I believe that this article be demoted to a good article. Razorflame 15:12, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
      Othwe websites (and another table) added; other websites need review; ideally,they should be halved in size. --Eptalon (talk) 16:44, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
    • Support demotion per above. --Thamusemeantfan (talk) 15:02, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
    • Demote to GA status. · Tygrrr... 15:38, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
Mouthpiece (brass) (change · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)
(4.7 kb) - demoted to good article status
    • Support demotion - Too short. Doesn't meet the size requirement Razorflame 20:22, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
    • Support demotion per above. --Thamusemeantfan (talk) 15:02, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
    • Demote to GA status. · Tygrrr... 15:38, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Pope John Paul II

Pope John Paul II (change · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)
- kept as a very good article

Article does not cite any sources, and is one of the only VGAs with none, the other two being Japanese tea ceremony and Mali. For an article like this, there should be tons of sources, for they should be fairly easy to find. --Thamusemeantfan (talk) 05:26, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

    • Support demotion - No sources imply unsure information. They're quite necessary in a VG article.--Gwib -(talk)- 06:32, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
    • Support demotion - as per Gwib. Razorflame 20:22, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
Just to let you know, I added some sources (references), amongst others to the official biography at the Vatican; I also extended the article a little. While we are at it, I think it would be good to make the section on his teachings bigger, possibly reference his publications (they are all available at the Vatican). --Eptalon (talk) 14:49, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
Update:Extended a bit (wrote about his travels, what he taught, added references), there are currently a little under 10 red links (that still need to be created); I would really appreciate if this could be done. --Eptalon (talk) 16:48, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
I'll fix a couple of them and try to add some references while I'm there. --Gwib -(talk)- 17:03, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
Another update, with Gwibs help, we now have an extended version, which has again no redlinks.--Eptalon (talk) 19:41, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
Much better than before :). However sentences like "The official time of death on his death certificate was 9:37 pm" could do with sources. --Gwib -(talk)- 19:54, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
    • Oppose demotion, it has gotten much better. --Thamusemeantfan (talk) 15:04, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
    • Oppose demotion It has indeed gotten better. Razorflame 15:56, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Mali

Mali (change · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)
- demoted to regular status

The article on Mali has two problems: too many redlinks, and too little sources. Also, because of the fact it has no references, it has an improvement template, so it only meets 70% of the criteria. --Thamusemeantfan (talk) 05:44, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

    • Support demotion - as per nomination. Razorflame 20:23, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
  • In its current form, this is IMO the prototype for a good article; I therefore think it should be reclassified. --Eptalon (talk) 15:12, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
    • It could not be a good article because it doesn't meet the no improvement templates requirement. Razorflame 15:13, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
    • Support demotion to GA status IF sources are added. --Thamusemeantfan (talk) 15:07, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
    • If sources are added and the amount of redlinks are decreased, it may be demoted to GA status. If both these things are not fulfilled, it needs to be demoted to regular article status. Either way, it's certainly not ready to be a VGA yet. · Tygrrr... 15:59, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
      • I would be more than willing to try to fill in some of the red links. As for the references, that is beyond me, but I will indeed try to fill in the red links. Razorflame 16:01, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Subtropical cyclone

Subtropical cyclone (change · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)
- demoted to regular status

Subtropical cyclone has a {{complex}} tag in it, breaking rule #9 of the criteria. It needs some simplifying. --Thamusemeantfan (talk) 05:50, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

    • Support demotion - as per nomination. Razorflame 20:23, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
    • Support demotion --Gwib -(talk)- 20:39, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
*sigh* I worked my ass off for this including about a dozen more articles. What else could be worse? --§ Snake311 (click here to chat) 20:38, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
Death. --Gwib -(talk)- 20:39, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
Wrong. Being alive. --§ Snake311 (click here to chat) 20:46, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
    • Support demotion per above. --Thamusemeantfan (talk) 15:06, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
    • Support demotion, see my comment on its talk page. I think the subject is so difficult that it would need a lot more of explanation to become as simple as a good or very good article should be. I am sure we have articles that are more complicated and have no tag, because everybody thinks that the subject they deal with cannot be dealt with in a really easy way. But if we decide to call an article good it should be easy enough. --Cethegus (talk) 16:43, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Muhammad

Muhammad (change · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)
- demoted to good article status

This article uses the Islam template. This template still has about 13 red links. These red links are also in the Muhammad article; I therefore propose an community effort to fix these (which will also help Islam, proposed as a Good article). --Eptalon (talk) 21:11, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Support demotion to GA status but not exactly because of the redlinks. Even if those are fixed, I feel that this article is not quite up to VGA standards. I opposed its promotion because the wording was confusing. I think there is still a large amount of room for improvement in the wording, which is indicated by Amandajm's recent changes to the article. · Tygrrr... 14:59, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
Support demotion to GA status as per Tygrrr. Razorflame 15:03, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
Support demotion to GA status. --Thamusemeantfan (talk) 15:06, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

LSD

LSD (change · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)
Discussion ends on February 26, 2008. - Result: kept as a VGA --Eptalon (talk) 10:18, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

The links given in various categories of other websites are almost half of the article; cut down on links, or make article longer --Eptalon (talk) 16:37, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

It looks like Gwib cut down on the links; are there any other problems in this article or should we withdraw the proposal? --Thamusemeantfan (talk) 06:26, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
Not to my knowledge--Eptalon (talk) 11:31, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Timpani

Timpani (change · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)
Discussion ends on February 26, 2008. - Result: kept as a VGA --Eptalon (talk) 10:18, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Visually looks a little short; have not done exact measurements though --Eptalon (talk) 16:37, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Oppose demotion I just removed all of the extra stuff to see how long the article is, and it is still 6.05kbs. Razorflame 16:41, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

As I wrote above, I had no exact measurements; in other words, we still need to get a "feeling" how big a 5k (or 3.5k) article really is (visually speaking)--Eptalon (talk) 13:20, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
I removed all of the extra stuff and it was still 6.05 kbs. Razorflame 14:57, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
Where does this article proposal stand? --Thamusemeantfan (talk) 06:27, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
It visually looks a little short, but it fulfills the size reqs. Therefore I do not see a reason to demote it, for the moment. --Eptalon (talk) 12:02, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Justin Timberlake

Justin Timberlake (change · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)
Discussion ends on March 3, 2008.

Visually looks like a short article, doesn't have a very satisfying references section, doesn't have very good sentence structure, and overall, feels like an article that has need of much more work to be done before it can be ready to be a VGA. I would suggest this be promoted down to a regular article unless someone is able to do an extensive copyedit of this article to make it more appropriate for this Wikipedia. Razorflame 16:13, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

As far as size goes, the article is 6 kb main text. · Tygrrr... 16:43, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Support

  • I support demotion to GA because of too many redlinks. --Thamusemeantfan (talk) 02:25, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Support - Too many red links and too few references. Chenzw (talkchanges) 12:32, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Oppose

Comments

Chopstick

Chopstick (change · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)
Discussion ends on March 3, 2008.

This article was recently demoted from VGA status to GA status, however, I have concerns that it doesn't meet all of the GA requirements. As per the Wikipedia:Simple talk page, I have decided that the {{fact}} template should count as a article improvement template, meaning that this page doesn't meet all of the requirements to be a GA. Razorflame 16:20, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

I agree. --Thamusemeantfan (talk) 02:26, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Support

Oppose

  • Oppose demotion - Eptalon's edits seem to have solved the problem about the article needing references. Chenzw (talkchanges) 02:47, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Oppose demotion per Chenzw. --Thamusemeantfan (talk) 00:44, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Comments

I have updated the article; replaced all {{fact}} by websites I found; I have also extended the article a bit. Please go over it to make sure it again meets the criteria; can this be re-promoted to VGA? --Eptalon (talk) 13:49, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

India

India (change · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)
Discussion ends on March 3, 2008.

This article fails the requirements for no redlinks. It could also use some copyediting. I know for a fact that this article doesn't meet all the requirements for either VGAs or GAs, so therefore, I am recommending that this article be demoted to regular status unless these 2 issues are fixed. If the 2 issues are fixed, I will gladly withdraw this request. Razorflame 16:30, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Removed red link, by copyediting what are you implying? Cleanup or just sentence structure. --Gwib -(talk)- 17:01, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
Sentence structure. Sentences are too long; they need to be broken down into shorter, easier sentences. Razorflame 17:05, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
Again meets the requirements; Not arguing about a possible copyedit; VGA/GA is not about the length of sentences or their structure. --Eptalon (talk) 18:13, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
I beg to differ, actually. I think in addition to blindly determining whether or not the criteria are met, there is a bit of common sense involved when reading the article to determine whether one actually thinks "hey, this article is pretty good" while reading it. If the standard criteria are met, I personally read it with a critical eye as to whether or not I think the article is truly good or very good. I believe that's why the process involves discussion and voting and isn't entirely automated. · Tygrrr... 18:58, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Demote to regular status. This article needs a lot of work, IMHO. I've done a quick copyedit and linked some important words that weren't linked, thus creating some redlinks. In particular, the history and economy sections need improvement. The history section needs quite a bit of expansion and doesn't read very easily. The economy section uses pretty complex language and raises more questions than it answers (What's a "knowledge hub"? What does it mean that it compares to the US, UK, Russia? What are "share points"? And shouldn't rupees be mentioned earlier in that section than the final sentence?) Like I said, I just feel like this article isn't quite ready to be considered good, let alone very good. · Tygrrr... 18:58, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Violin

Violin (change · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)
Discussion ends on March 3, 2008.

This article fails the requirements for references; it has no references. It also fails requirement #8, because it has the {{unreferenced}} template on it. It could also use a copyediting for sentence fluidity and general spell checking. I am in full support of this being downgraded to regular article status, but will happily withdraw this request if these issues are fixed. Razorflame 17:08, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

The respective section is called Further reading (Which should probably be simplfied); This article meets the VGA reqs. --Eptalon (talk) 18:15, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
One footnote has been added and I just scanned the article for spelling errors. None, except for one British spelling of a word. --Thamusemeantfan (talk) 06:31, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Fall of Man

Fall of Man (change · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)
Discussion ends on March 3, 2008.

This article fails the requirement for redlinks; it has a red link. It could also use a bit of copyediting, mainly to make the sentences shorter, and to make some of the sentences flow smoother. I support this article be demoted to regular article status if the red link isn't fixed; if both the red link and copyediting are fixed, then I will withdraw this request. Razorflame 17:15, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Just an idea, but instead of highlighting all of the article's faults, you could work to fix them? --Gwib -(talk)- 17:16, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
I would love to help working on fixing the articles, but to tell you the truth, I actually am working on simplifying a big article from EN:WP for posting here, and I am doing so in Word because of how big it is. I should have it ready within a few more days, but it is slow going. That is the only place that I want to devote my copyediting time to, because it is a very big drain on my copyediting skills. That is why you haven't seen me doing much copyediting as of late; because I am wanting to get this big article posted onto the Simple English Wikipedia. Razorflame 17:23, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
I'm going through the IB at the moment and have homework which could probably be measured in megatons. Yet, somehow I find the time to change a comma to a full stop or create a one paragraph article if it might help out this wiki. --Gwib -(talk)- 17:28, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
Can you point to the redlink please? - Also please note VGA is not about readability, or sentence structure. --Eptalon (talk) 18:24, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
Again, I beg to differ on this, Eptalon. Please read my comment above under "India". Thanks. · Tygrrr... 19:00, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
I must agree with Tygrrr. How can a VG article not be readable or have a bad sentence structure - ie be written in bad english? --Bärliner 19:07, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
Razorflame/Eptalon, are the redlinks for humanity and pelagianism. Actually there are not red, but burgundy. My misc settings highlight all links to stubs shorter than 1K. But that is not a VGA criterion.--Bärliner 21:00, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
No, the one red link that I was talking about was filled in by Gwib about 5 hours ago. That was the red link that I was talking about. Razorflame 21:03, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

(unindenting) I extended Pelagianism this morning. To reiterate my statement: GA or VGA criteria are formal criteria an article must meet to get the respective tag; They do not talk about readability, or sentence structure. If you as the community believe that this status is also about such things, we should modify the criteria to reflect that. --Eptalon (talk) 08:10, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

As far as I understand, there is agreement, that VGAs and GAs should be written in simple English. Readability and sentence structure are a vital characteristic of simple English. --Cethegus (talk) 08:53, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
That's what I believe the community process (multiple revisions; possibly by different editors) is for.. --Eptalon (talk) 10:22, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
I agree. But one cannot declare an article as VGA before the improvements have taken place. (I would happily involve myself in the process if my English were better. As it is not, I don't try to produce VGAs myself.) --Cethegus (talk) 14:13, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
Reply to Eptalon's comment "we should modify the criteria to reflect that": There are 2 steps to this process, 1. seeing if the criteria are met and 2. reading the articles, copyediting them, discussing them, and finally voting on them to decide whether the really are good. I don't think anything needs to change, as it is already inherent in the process itself that a critical review for readability and quality must occur when voting. Again, the mere fact that the process isn't automated means we are supposed to use judgment about the quality of the articles. · Tygrrr... 15:43, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Music

Music (change · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)
Discussion ends on March 8, 2008.

This article, for its size has way too little references, and has numerous POV problems, for example: "People should choose an instrument that they enjoy playing, because playing regularly is the only way to get better. Finally, it helps to have a good teacher. Another excerpt: There is so much music today, in elevators, shopping malls, and stores, that music it often becomes a background sound that we do not really hear. --Thamusemeantfan (talk) 02:40, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

List of California hurricanes

List of California hurricanes (change · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)
Discussion ends on March 9, 2008.

The main problem with this article is the size. With all extra fluff removed, this article is only 3.6 kb, and it is short visually. --Thamusemeantfan (talk) 00:37, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, I messed up on the count. It is actually 5.1 with everything in it, but my proposal still stands because it is visually way too short. --Thamusemeantfan (talk) 00:42, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Support Article is too short. In addition, the article's title seems a bit inappropriate as there is information on California hurricanes, not just a list. Chenzw (talkchanges) 12:36, 2 March 2008 (UTC)


List of Arizona hurricanes

List of Arizona hurricanes (change · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)
Discussion ends on March 27, 2008.
I think that this article is too short to be a very good article. There is only one section of prose, and it is one of the shorter VGAs. --Thamusemeantfan (talk) 01:38, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Support demotion due to lack of length and because it needs a major copyediting to shorten sentence length et al. Razorflame 01:53, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Justin Timberlake

Justin Timberlake (change · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)

This article has over 10 red links (none are allowed for a "good" article status). Some of the structure didn't fit, so overall the article doesn't, in my opinion, meet the full criteria. AmericanEagle 00:27, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

  • Support - Too short also.--   ChristianMan16  01:52, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Support - There is one whole section containing red links. Chenzw  Talk  01:54, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
 Comment True, but PGOOD says "All important terms should be linked and there must not be many red links left." -- AmericanEagle 04:28, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
Result: Demoted --Eptalon (talk) 13:58, 27 May 2008 (U