Wikipedia:Featured article review/Trembling Before G-d/archive1
- The following is an archived discussion of a featured article review. Please do not modify it. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page or at Wikipedia talk:Featured article review. No further edits should be made to this page.
The article was delisted by Nikkimaria via FACBot (talk) 8:50, 14 December 2024 (UTC) [1].
- Notified: Dev920, WikiProject Film, WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies, diff for talk page notification (2024-10-16)
Review section
[edit]The article is now in either so-so shape or worse (but still probably no longer FA-quality). Some statements may need to be verified by reliable sources. The merger with the poorly-shaped soundtrack article worsened the parent film article's quality. The Reception section needs probably either some balance or more opinions of non-religious critics. A few years after raising my concerns, not much has been done to address my concerns. George Ho (talk) 05:33, 17 November 2024 (UTC); edited, 21:00, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm. A very old (2007) FA that is underdeveloped by modern standards. The "Synopsis" section consists of listy and stubby paras, and the "Legacy" section is about reissues rather than critical analysis or influence. Very heavy lifting needed per George (initial concerns raised in 2021), although the original nominator is still active. Ceoil (talk) 07:58, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Move to FARC no edits to address concerns to the article since its FAR nomination. Z1720 (talk) 15:18, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
FARC section
[edit]- Issues raised in the review section include sourcing and comprehensiveness. Nikkimaria (talk) 18:17, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Delist No edits since October, concerns outlined above remain in the article. Z1720 (talk) 02:26, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Delist; I have doubts that a number of the web sources used are high-quality RS - masada.world, dvdverdict.com, wiredgecko.net, NARTH, etc. Hog Farm Talk 04:18, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Delist on the basis of poor sourcing, prose including overuse of quotes and comprehensiveness. Does not seem likely that we will see work here. Ceoil (talk) 14:17, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Closing note: This removal candidate has been delisted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please leave the {{featured article review}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Nikkimaria (talk) 18:50, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.