Wikipedia:Featured article review/Algorithm: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
→[[Algorithm]]: reply |
MalnadachBot (talk | contribs) m Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12) |
||
| (19 intermediate revisions by 10 users not shown) | |||
Line 1:
=== [[Algorithm]] ===
:''Article is [[Wikipedia:Former featured articles|no longer a featured article]].''
I feel that this article as it stands should not be a featured articles. It lacks references, is incoherently written and the history section is almost completely missing. —''[[User:R._Koot|Ruud]]'' 23:03, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
Line 5 ⟶ 6:
*'''Comment''' Have this issues been taken in the article talk page before nominating it for FARC? If not, '''remove/close this nomination'''. [[User:Joelr31|Joelito]] ([[User talk:Joelr31|talk]]) 00:22, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
** The todo-list has been there for a long time... these are not problems which are going to be fixed on short notice. —''[[User:R._Koot|Ruud]]'' 01:03, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
***The to-do list does not mention any of the problems/issues you are concerned about. [[User:Joelr31|Joelito]] ([[User talk:Joelr31|talk]]) 01:12, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
**** It does. —''[[User:R._Koot|Ruud]]'' 01:41, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
*****Algorith's to do
******Rewrite the history section
******Ancient algorithms (Babylonians, Euclid, Sieve)
******Formalization (Turing machines, Lambda calculus, Church-Turing thesis
*****Where does it say anything about references or writing cohesion? The only thing that it mentions is the history section. It must also be noted that the to-do was created on February 1, 2006. [[User:Joelr31|Joelito]] ([[User talk:Joelr31|talk]]) 02:15, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
****** You said "''any'' of the problems" (emphasis added). —''[[User:R._Koot|Ruud]]'' 02:41, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
*******I never said "any" on my original comment but that's not the point. Please remove the nomination and follow the procedure for FARC. [[User:Joelr31|Joelito]] ([[User talk:Joelr31|talk]]) 03:07, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
******** Seriously though, in its current state this should not be a featured article and there's a [[WP:SNOW|snowball's chance in hell]] that is will be anytime soon, whether I express all of my concerns on the talk page or only one of them. —''[[User:R._Koot|Ruud]]'' 03:19, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
*********You may be correct but the procedure must be followed to give editors a chance to improve the article. [[User:Joelr31|Joelito]] ([[User talk:Joelr31|talk]]) 03:21, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
*'''Remove'''. The pending task has been sitting there since February. There's been a section stub notice sitting in the article since February. Anyone editing this article more than casually would have to have been pretty blind not to notice these things. [[User:Christopher Parham|Christopher Parham]] [[User talk:Christopher Parham|(talk)]] 07:52, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
*'''Remove''' per cp [[User:Zzzzz|Zzzzz]] 18:40, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
*'''Remove''' as per Allan McInnes -[[User:R. S. Shaw|R. S. Shaw]] 06:10, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' We need for an article about algorithm. Unless there is a better one elsewhere on Wikipedia. We need also for more external links. [[User:Splang|Splang]] 06:43, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
** This is not [[WP:AFD]] (nor is Wikipedia a linkfarm). —''[[User:R._Koot|Ruud]]'' 10:09, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
***The page in question is the entry point for a big amout of articles about Algos. I the page is removed of featured list of article, we need for another page to replace it (in this list) as entry point. Of course the page itself must be valuable. Secondly, the guideline allow to add external links and they are part of content of the page. Removing them is vandalism. There is now just 2 links in this article. Can't be justified. [[User:Splang|Splang]] 06:36, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
*'''Remove'''. It's not horrible but it's not good enough for featured status. It really needs more careful referencing. [[User:Haukurth|Haukur]] 14:33, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
*<span style="color:red;">'''Invalid nomination'''</span>—No notice, as required, has been provided on the talk page. A directive that the article "must be rewritten in a langage with a more conventionnal syntax" has recently appeared, but that does not fulfill the requirements here; nor does a "to do" list from some time ago. [[User:Tony1|Tony]] 02:21, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
| |||