Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Devi Mahatmya/archive1

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 04:25, 4 November 2007.

Devi Mahatmya[edit]

I'm nominating this article for featured article because it deals with a scripture which was the first religious text which enunciated the Supreme Deity exclusively as a Female Principle. The article is comprehensive, well referenced, and deals with all aspects of the scripture.

"self-nomination"

Sankarrukku 18:05, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I recommend that you alphabetize "References" and that the Rferences use same font size as "Notes". I added some "Further Reading"; you may want to change font in this section to match other sections. Good luck with your nomination to Featured Article status. Rosiestephenson 17:52, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Done.--Sankarrukku 10:35, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Object - References need to be put in a consistent format. Some parts are a bit thin on sources and other parts consist of many one line paragraphs and so forth. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 01:10, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Liturgy" and "Place in hindu Canon" need to have more smooth flow. Many one sentence paras and dot-pointesque sentences.Blnguyen (bananabucket) 01:13, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Corrections made in "Liturgy" and "Place in Hindu Canon".--Sankarrukku 10:35, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment, I archived the peer review. Please see the instructions at both WP:PR and WP:FAC; articles shouldn't be submitted both places at the same time. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:40, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think the article should first be peer reviewed thouroughly. So maybe this FAC can be archived instead of the peer review? – Ilse @ 07:42, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Same view as Ilse.--Redtigerxyz 14:03, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No & Oppose

On the basis that it does not fulfill #1d NPOV. Learnedo 09:12, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. 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.