Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Peter Falconio/archive1

Peter Falconio[edit]

I believe this is a great example of how to cover a case like this. The development reads compellingly, and the facts are presented neutrally. I'm not a fan of covering current events on WP,but if we're going to do it, this is a fine example. - Just zis Guy, you know? ^[T]/_[C] AfD? 20:20, 25 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Object. The lead is too short, the article is missing a References section and requires some form of in-line citations using footnotes. The article is very listy, all the lists need to be rewritten as proper sentences and paragraphs. I'm also not quite keen on the 'Missing person or murder?' header title with it being a question. Image:Joanneleesfrontpage.jpg is missing a fair use rationale and source, Image:Falconio_couple203.jpg's license templates are clashing, PD and fair use? and its missing a source, Image:Peterfalconio.jpg has no source information, Image:Bjmurdochmugshot.jpg has an unsure license and no source, Image:Murdochcctvimage.jpg is missing a source and fair use rationale, Image:Barrowcreek.jpg is missing a source and a fair use rationale!, The other images on the page also have source/license problems. — Wackymacs 22:12, 25 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Object. While this article's title, under Wikipedia practice, indicates its subject is Peter Falconio, it contains next to no information about him. This article appears to be an exhaustive discussion about his disappearance and the trial of his killer. Whatever the merits of the writing and research, I'm not even convinced the subject of the article meets the notability test; unfortunately, an individual murder is not "notable" in and of itself, and I've seen AfD notices over (much shorter) articles on crime victims. At the very least, the subject of the article should be more appropriately specified by its title, and a clear explanation of of any claim of notability is needed. Monicasdude 23:29, 25 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Comment OK, OK, I got carried away. Withdrawn, yes it needs a little more work. I like it a lot, though. - Just zis Guy, you know? ^[T]/_[C] AfD? 23:33, 25 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Great article. Three minor points; Is the article on Falconio or his disappearence, a title cchange should happen. There are a few lists, maybe something to think about...and I dont see the need for the second Murdoch image. Other than that, fantastic! (Smerk 02:25, 26 December 2005 (UTC))[reply]

Object agree with the comments above especially relating to references and the transformation of material from list to prose. The article is not about Peter Falconio. About 75% seems to be about the trial of Bradley Murdoch. Therefore even calling the article "The Disappearance of Peter Falconio" would be incorrect. It is more "The Trial of Bradley Murdoch" than anything else - Falconio emerges from the current article as little more than a supporting character - his bio is so scant we don't even have a date of birth for him. I think the case is well and truly notable - I don't think there is any problem there. Maybe not notable in the world media, but in the Australian and to a lesser degree British media, absolutely notable. Rossrs 02:45, 26 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]