Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/No Diggity/archive1
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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 16:57, 28 June 2007.
No Diggity[edit]
This will easily make a great Featured Article, put it on the main page as it is! --Houghterside 18:46, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Object — very short, no references. Pagrashtak 19:23, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Object - your enthusiasm is greatly appreciated. To get an idea of what is needed for an article to acquire Featured status, please take a look at articles that are already Featured, as well as WP:WIAFA for the criteria of Featured Articles. Thanks! SeleneFN 21:08, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Object — and suggest removal as per WP:SNOW. Verisimilus T 10:55, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Object - but I will take this to the relevant WikiProject for discussion. --SunStar Net talk 08:57, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Object nowhere near ready, but I suspect this nomination was merely a prank.Legalbeaver 17:28, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose - Sorry man but there are no references, the external link to Youtube in the middle of the text just kills the nomination in various levels, the first one being that it goes aganist Wikipedia's Manual of Style and the other is that Youtube isn't reliable even for External Links (serious copyright violations), a section on how the single was received would be nice also. -凶 10:47, 23 June 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.