Wikipedia:Peer review/Campbell's Soup Cans/archive2

Campbell's Soup Cans[edit]

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

I've listed this article for peer review because it was recommended at the failed Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Campbell's Soup Cans/archive2. When it was demoted at Wikipedia:Featured article review/Campbell's Soup Cans/archive1 the review mentioned both "unattributed opinion" and "uncited text" as well as MOS concerns. Please point out any remaining problems from either of those two reviews and help me address them. I believe I have addressed the image issues.

Thanks, TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 07:24, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. Be advised that I intend to pursue ~~WP:GA, WP:DYK~~ and WP:FA for this article.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 09:41, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I am reverting User:TheWikiToby's closure.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 17:44, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Please note that Wikipedia:Peer review/Review closure policy had been incorrectly closed due to a misinterpretation of the inactive discussion rules. An inactive discussion, is one in which a review has begun and received some feedback and the subsequent discourse has become inactive. It is not a review with no feedback. There is a separate set of rules regarding limits for articles hoping for feedback. WP:PR has a noticeboard for reviews that have had no feedback for a long time (well over a month).-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 20:12, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Query from Z1720[edit]

@TonyTheTiger: This has been open for quite a long time without comment. Can this be closed and nominated to WP:FAC, or are you still looking for feedback? Z1720 (talk) 01:52, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'd prefer feedback. No hurry for FAC.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 02:32, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- I know the article is long and detailed, but that probably means there is a lot to improve. I'd rather wait another 7 months than go to FAC. Ping me in another 7 months if it still has not been reviewed.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 02:38, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@TonyTheTiger: The longer a PR stays open, the less likely it is to get comments. Also, it has been difficult for some PRs to get feedback, especially ones that are to go to FAC or are as long as this article. I am also aware of the fact that this PR should have closed when it was nominated for GAN a couple months ago, per the instructions, step 4. If you want to keep this open, I suggest that you post a request on the Wikiprojects attached to this article to see if anyone would like to leave feedback. Bringing it to FAC might also generate feedback on how to improve the article, even if it is unsuccessful. Z1720 (talk) 18:13, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]