Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Harry Potter/archive4

The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was not promoted by SandyGeorgia 11:14, 16 May 2010 [1].

Harry Potter[edit]

Nominator(s): Guy546^(Talk) 02:50, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating this for featured article because I have worked hard on it and have read previous peer reviews and the most recent FAC. Happy reviewing! Guy546^(Talk) 02:50, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments A quick look around finds:

References: several dead links; outdated and missing retrieved on dates.
Alt text could be more descriptive of the images. Some images missing captions.
Overlinking in article. How many links do we need to Bloomsbury, Scholastic, and each book and or movie?
Series needs disambiguating. --Brad (talk) 04:11, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Were the top contributors to the article consulted before this nomination? Dabomb87 (talk) 04:43, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Reply Yes, but alot of the major editors haven't edited for a while, so I only updated a few.Guy546^(Talk) 05:11, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The top contributor Serendipodous (talk · contribs) just made some edits today. I don't see any notification on their talk page. --Brad (talk) 10:29, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Media

File:Harry_Potter_Books.png -No valid FU rationale breaching wp:nfcc and FAC3
File:Coat_of_arms_Hogwarts.svg - I would be very surprised if this is not a derived work of a non-free design, breaching wp:nfcc
File:Hp_british_books!.jpg - Is derived from non free content thus improperly licenced breaching FAC3
File:Jk-rowling-crop.JPG - This should be verified through WP:OTRS per commons:Commons:Project_scope/Precautionary_principle
File:The_elephant_house.jpg - Lacks a caption per FAC3
File:GWR_'Hall'_5972_'Olton_Hall'_at_Doncaster_Works.JPG is currently tagged as "This file is missing evidence of permission", this should be rectified

Fasach Nua (talk) 06:02, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Guy546, please stop doing this: FAC processes have been explained to you before. If you want to bring an article to FAC, please develop one through peer review or possibly GA and consult and work with the primary contributors. I will remove this FAC. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 11:12, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Object: Exactly the same things that stopped this article's last nomination are still wrong with it. The Themes section needs to be expanded, scholarly sources need to be found to give some idea of the subtexts and meanings in the work. Someone needs to troll Google Scholar for references to give this piece some scholarly heft. I'd be willing if someone else were willing to collaborate. Serendi ^pod ous 16:58, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.