Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Winston Churchill/archive2

Winston Churchill

This is one of the best written biography articles. Conforms to NPoV and is based on solid fact. Brings out the major points and summarises the not so major ones. Has lots of interesting info.--May the Force be with you! Shreshth91($ |-| r 3 $ |-| t |-|) 11:50, 17 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Self nom. --May the Force be with you! Shreshth91($ |-| r 3 $ |-| t |-|) 11:50, 17 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Object for now - it would be nic with more inline citations of historicaly important information, and the section 'Role as wartime Prime Minister' has a tag on it requesting expansion. Fix that, and I'm likely to support. WegianWarrior 12:12, 17 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Would you mind specifying this objection a bit? Just "more inline citations" is difficult to amend. I assume that you by now have read my take on the question of footnotes as well. Peter ^Isotalo 03:19, 18 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  - As far as I can tell, there is no inline citations at all in the article - thus making it hard for me to verify the information without reading thru all the sources listed under referneces. May I suggest the system of {{ref|<name>}} and {{note|<name>}} outlined at Wikipedia:Footnote3. I've been using it in articles I've written with good effect. Use of inline citations are an aid to verifiability, which is imortant for Wikipedia. WegianWarrior 09:08, 18 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Object
1. The image Image:Winstonchurchilltimemagazine.jpg needs a fair use rationale. The {{TIME}} tag only covers use in an article describing that issue.
2. The image Image:Chrost.jpg needs source information and a fair use rationale. It's a particularly famous photograph, so fair use can easily be justified. I think the original version of the image uploaded to Wikipedia, [1], has information you can use to track down the source.
3. The image Image:Church5155.jpg has no source or copyright information.
4. The image Image:Ac.eisenhower2.jpg is claimed under fair use. It isn't essential to the article, and should probably be removed.
5. The image Image:ChurchillFuneralProcession.jpg needs a fair use rational. Alternatively, would it be possible to replace it with an image that doesn't have a watermark scrawled across the middle?
Also, the "trivia" section should probably be eliminated, with the information from it integrated into the rest of the article. --Carnildo 19:12, 17 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
yes, miscellany section needs merging into main body; "churchill as historian" needs subheadings; and "role as wartime PM" could be expanded. Image issues also need fixing. On the TIME image - {{TIME}} indicates use "to illustrate the publication of the issue in question", so the magazine issue should also be mentioned in the text. Quite close to FA but no cigar just yet. Rd232 23:21, 17 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Object. Fails to adequately describe Churchill's role in post WWI Anglo-Irish negotiations; implication that his role was pro forma treaty signatory is misleading. Monicasdude 16:46, 18 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Object -- the trivia should be integrated within the text. I see no reason why we should have Churchill's cabinet members etc. here, move it to another page. =Nichalp «Talk»= 19:12, August 18, 2005 (UTC)
This article is tagged with {{expansion}}, which is utterly unacceptable on a featured article. Either the tag needs to come out, the section be expanded, or both. →Raul654 22:39, August 20, 2005 (UTC)