Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Centennial Light/archive1
Self nomination. The article has been throughly researched and cited and has now reached a good state of stability. It's a little short for a featured article, but I hope that won't be a big problem. --The_stuart 15:44, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
- Please expand all of your websources in footnotes: they should include no blue-link URLs, last access date, and name of the webhost. I fixed your footnote placement. Sources used in references/notes need not be repeated in External links. Sandy (Talk) 15:53, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
- Object—Is this a serious nomination? Why am I reading "the worlds longest lasting light bulb" ("the world's longest-lasting light bulb") in what is a stubby, inadequate lead? "hand blown bulb"—hyphen please? Poorly written throughout. Stub. Tony 14:25, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
- Comment - this is probably the most referenced stub in the history of humanity.
--Howard the Duck 05:06, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
- Comment - this is probably the most referenced stub in the history of humanity.
- Object – Tony's a bit harsh calling it a stub (it's only slightly shorter than
Hurricane Irene (2005)), but I'd definitely agree about the quality of the writing. The lead needs to be bulked up, and the prose needs a run through a thorough peer review. And given the number of available sources on the subject, I'm sure it'd be possible to add some more substance to the article. It's just not ready yet. GeeJo (t)⁄(c) • 15:13, 21 December 2006 (UTC) - Strong Object it's nowhere near ready to go as a FA. However, unlike Tony, I totally agree with getting it up to snuff and featuring it. I like the quirky side of Wikipedia. There are many problems with the prose, it simply doesn't have any continuity. "The bulb was manufactured in Shelby, Ohio by the Shelby Electric Company[3] in the late 1890s. Shelby Electric Company was purchased by General Electric in 1914.[4] It is a 4 watt[5] hand blown bulb with a carbon filament.[1]" How about "The bulb is a 4 watt hand blown bulb with a carbon filament manufactured by the Shelby Electric Company of Shelby, Ohio, in the late 1890s." "It is a common light bulb produced by the Shelby Electric Company, of which many just like it still exist and can be found functioning.[6]" It is or it was? If it is as this says, then that would explain why "many just like it still exist" because they're being manufactured today. No continuity, the prose needs too much work, too much wrong for FA consideration right now. But love the funky topic, and will support it when it comes back cleaned up and ready. KP Botany 00:20, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
