Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Eutrophication/archive1
I ran across this article and it seems to meet the criteria. It is well written, and really helped me understand the subject. It is referenced, organized and has a useful illustration. ike9898 13:52, Apr 29, 2005 (UTC)
- Object 1) the lead is too short for the length of the article. 2) aren't there any other images that could illustrate this (i.e. charts and graphs). 3) The third-level headings result in too many short sections; these should be combined or at least changed from sections to something that doesn't use section headers. 4) The article text doesn't wikilink to very many articles; for example, the third paragraph in section 1.1 should link to the geographic locations for each of the names. slambo 15:20, Apr 29, 2005 (UTC)
- I think that I've addressed concerns #2 and #4 since you wrote this. Have another look, if you don't mind. ike9898 16:30, Apr 29, 2005 (UTC)
- Object. The lead is too short and there are too many subsections with little content; either expand the subsections or consider removing the third-level headings. The US EPA picture that was added is informative but it is of very poor quality. Replace it if you can find a better one (this is not part of my objection). Otherwise, good article. The large reference section, as well as the knowledgeable writing, attest extensive research. Phils 17:02, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Object I think ike9898 is correct in nominating this article, as it is full of facts and covers the subject well. My objection is that the writing is a bit difficult to follow in places and I agree with Phils about the layout. Although some parts are very good, there are others that really make little sense. I will try and fix those myself, but it could takea few days. I'm also not thrilled with the illustrations and charts (the EPA chart is just too busy or fuzzy), but that is really minor objection. - Marshman 17:28, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC) Changed my vote - Marshman 18:49, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)