|
**I've reduced the lead section to two paragraphs. Is this better? --[[User:David Crawshaw|d]] 07:22, 5 Sep 2004 (UTC)
* Absolutely object. This is ''nowhere'' near as complete as it should be. Where the heck is commentary of the five books he's written? What about his relationship to Gough Whitlam (get the latest Quarterly Essay if your an Aussie)? Where is the information on his leadership of Liverpool Council? <s>Where is the information on his colourful language?</s> (oops, that's there) I could go on and on... though I might just start adding to this. - [[User:Ta bu shi da yu|Ta bu shi da yu]] 07:41, 5 Sep 2004 (UTC)
===[[Falklands War]]===
Having stumbled across it, I was truly impressed. It seems well written and well researched. There are numerous maps, links to other very good articles, and it concerns one of the most important naval conflicts since the end of the Second World World, (as the article points out).
I also think that there are many ''yanks'' of my generation who don't know very much about this important conflict. I was about 9 at the time, and the Falklands were barely a blip on my childhood radar screen. The conclusion of the war lead to important political changes in Argentina, and to important changes in the navel preparedness of fleets around the world.
What really recommends it in my mind is that, while being entirely encyclopedic, it is also entirely ''riveting''. It is simply a fascinating story, especially the section detailing the relatively small group of Royal Marines who undertook to defend the isle against a navel fleet and its commandos. <tt>[[User:AdmN|AdmN]] 10:55, 4 Sep 2004 (UTC)</tt>
* Support after a references section is added. This is an article where this is necessary. - [[User:Ta bu shi da yu|Ta bu shi da yu]] 11:26, 4 Sep 2004 (UTC)
* Object for the moment - the writing style is clumsy (and grammatically incorrect in many places), and far too many of the links are red. I'll support if someone can go through and tidy up the writing and grammar - [[User:David Gerard|David Gerard]] 13:08, 4 Sep 2004 (UTC)
===[[Lord Chancellor]]===
-- [[User:Lord Emsworth|Emsworth]] 19:09, 3 Sep 2004 (UTC)
*Strong support. I've looked at this article in the past and have found it excellent. [[User:Neutrality|[[User:Neutrality|<b>Neutrality</b>]] ([[User talk:Neutrality|talk]])]] 19:11, 3 Sep 2004 (UTC)
*Also strongly support. Interesting and well researched. A good example of a high-quality Wikipedia article! - [[User:Ta bu shi da yu|Ta bu shi da yu]] 12:27, 4 Sep 2004 (UTC)
*Support. [[User:Jdforrester|James F.]] [[User_talk:Jdforrester|(talk)]] 13:21, 4 Sep 2004 (UTC)
*Support. Brilliant and thorough article [[User:Cyopardi|Cyopardi]] 16:45, 5 Sep 2004 (UTC)
*Support. Emsworth edited this? No brainer :) --[[User:Zerbey|Zerbey]] 02:45, 9 Sep 2004 (UTC)
===[[Cogito ergo sum]] ("I think therefore I am")===
*Under "More hierarchies" the article reads "This section should be rewritten." Presumably it should be, or the notice removed. [[User:Dan Gardner|Dan Gardner]] 17:43, 6 Sep 2004 (UTC)
**I've got quite a bit to do in that section, but other commitments... you know. I'm hoping to fix this bit in a month or so. [[User:Iain.mcclatchie|Iain McClatchie]] 18:56, 7 Sep 2004 (UTC)
* I skimmed it and it looks good, but Dan Gardner makes a valid point - any little to-do notes need to be taken out of the article. Generally speaking, meta data doesn't belong in the article. [[User:Raul654|→Raul654]] 04:44, Sep 10, 2004 (UTC)
===[[Windows XP]]===
Nominate this article, it's pretty much complete, not badly written and though it's been a controversial article it's had many eyes looking over it doing fact checking. - [[User:Ta bu shi da yu|Ta bu shi da yu]] 03:00, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)
* Support. Well-written, comprehensive, and concerns something recognizable to just about every reader. [[User:Solver|Solver]] 16:22, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)
*<strike>Object for now. The first paragraph says "Two versions of Windows XP are most commonly available: Home which is targeted at home users and doesn't allow users to join a ___domain, and Professional which has additional features such as dual-processor support and the ability to join a ___domain." The article should explain what "join a ___domain" means, possibly by making that text a hyperlink.</strike> -- [[User:Cabalamat|Cabalamat]] 18:48, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)
**Rhobite has added a section on domains. Not sure if this is useful. - [[User:Ta bu shi da yu|Ta bu shi da yu]] 14:21, 30 Aug 2004 (UTC)
***I don't know what that means, but if the objection breaks a wiki-code of behavior, allow me to apologize. [[User:LegCircus|LegCircus]] 16:08, Sep 9, 2004 (UTC)
****The directions at the top of this page say: ''All objections must give a specific rationale which can be responded to. If nothing can be done to "fix" the objected-to matter, the objection may be ignored.'' - in other words, if you object to the article because it is about a computer-related topic, there's nothing that anyone can do to "fix" your objection. Therefore, your objection is invalid. [[User:Raul654|→Raul654]] 16:33, Sep 9, 2004 (UTC)
*Object. As was said above, it's mostly list. [[User:Raul654|→Raul654]] 04:44, Sep 10, 2004 (UTC)
=== [[Du Fu]] ===
Self-nom. One of the world's great poets. [[User:Markalexander100|Markalexander100]] 07:18, 28 Aug 2004 (UTC)
*Support. --[[User:Shibboleth|Shibboleth]] 19:42, 28 Aug 2004 (UTC)
*Support, brilliant article. --[[User:Alxt|Alxt]] 19:59, 28 Aug 2004 (UTC)
*"Tu Fu" is more common: [http://www.googlefight.com/cgi-bin/compare.pl?q1=%22Tu+Fu%22+-wikipedia&q2=%22Du+Fu%22+-wikipedia&B1=Make+a+fight%21&compare=1&langue=us] --[[User:Jiang|Jia]][[User talk:Jiang|'''ng''']] 21:02, 28 Aug 2004 (UTC)
**This objection is unactionable. If we moved the article to [[Tu Fu]], others may well object that [[Wade-Giles]] is not "standard" enough. The googlefight is a dead heat: a 7% difference in usage doesn't amount to a clear victory for "Tu Fu", and there are counterarguments in favor of "Du Fu". Anyway, it's a really minor point, because there is a redirect. This well-written article shouldn't be held up over petty romanization disputes. --[[User:Shibboleth|Shibboleth]] 21:47, 28 Aug 2004 (UTC)
***I didn't object. I'm just noting a fact. Don't expect the article to stay where it is on that argument alone though. --[[User:Jiang|Jia]][[User talk:Jiang|'''ng''']] 03:04, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)
****"Tu" may be minimally more common on the Internet (although searching for each term individually gives "about 10,500" for each, and not all the hits for "Tu Fu" ''or'' "Du Fu" refer to our man); but "Du" is more common in current sinological (is that a word?) work, and the balance is shifting towards "Du". [[User:Markalexander100|Markalexander100]] 04:24, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)
*Would it be possible to include information about his calligraphy? Since handwriting is so valued in Chinese culture I think it might be appropriate. I do not object to this article, in fact I like it a lot, I just think it could be a bit more complete. -[[Use:Eudyptes|Eudyptes]] 02:49 29 Aug 2004
**I'm fairly sure that we know nothing about his own calligraphy, even in copies. I've added a sample of someone else's calligraphy of one of his poems, but I think that's all we can do. [[User:Markalexander100|Markalexander100]] 04:24, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)
***Good, then. Thanks. [[User:Eudyptes|Eudyptes]] 15:41 29 Aug 2004 UTC
*<s>Object - Nice article, but it needs a ==References== section. See [[Wikipedia:Cite your sources]].</s> --[[User:Maveric149|mav]]
**I've renamed "Further reading" as "References"- I hope that helps. [[User:Markalexander100|Markalexander100]] 03:42, 30 Aug 2004 (UTC)
***Were each of those listed items used as references? --mav
****Yes. I've always used "Further reading" as a synonym for "References", firstly because I wouldn't direct readers to something I haven't read, and secondly because "References" usually translates as "don't bother to read". But I'll use the latter if it's preferred. [[User:Markalexander100|Markalexander100]] 05:21, 30 Aug 2004 (UTC)
**"Further reading" would have been a useful category at Wikipedia. I used it when I arrived but was told not to. [[User:Wetman|Wetman]] 05:04, 30 Aug 2004 (UTC)
*Support. Great name! - [[User:Ta bu shi da yu|Ta bu shi da yu]] 10:42, 30 Aug 2004 (UTC)
*Support. [[User:Sverdrup|{{User:Sverdrup/sig}}]] 16:57, 30 Aug 2004 (UTC)
*Support. [[User:PedroPVZ|Pedro]] 19:47, 30 Aug 2004 (UTC)
*Support. [[User:Marlowe|Marlowe]] 19:32, 2 Sep 2004 (UTC)
*Objection: The paragraphs of the lead section are rather short (especially the first); they should either be extended or merged together. There are several short paragraphs in the article itself, as well (seven with one or two sentences each). -- [[User:Lord Emsworth|Emsworth]] 00:25, 6 Sep 2004 (UTC)
**The first paragraph of the lead is short for a very good reason: it allows readers who don't want to wade through all the Gongbus and Shaolins (which are boring but necessary) to skip them and start on the real article. The other paragraphs of the lead are three and two sentences respectively, but the last sentence of the two sentence paragraph is a long one. And as for the short paragraphs in the article: well, sometimes paragraphs ''are'' short. I've expanded a couple slightly, but the others contain as much information on the topic as is known. Extending those paragraphs would make the article worse by conflating unrelated information or by introducing useless verbiage. And there's nothing in the MoS against short paras. [[User:Markalexander100|Markalexander100]] 00:45, 6 Sep 2004 (UTC)
*Support: good article on a really important figure. What more can you ask? [[User:Bmills|Bmills]] 13:56, 6 Sep 2004 (UTC)
=== [[Anarchism in Spain]] ===
*[[Markup language]] (well, sort-of; suitable for main page? [[User:Jdforrester|James F.]]
[[User_talk:Jdforrester|(talk)]] 15:02, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)) (don't see why not [[User:Lupin|Lupin]] 00:37, 16 Jul 2004 (UTC))
*[[Milgram experiment]]
*[[Social history of the piano]] (Used on of sevearal pictures on [[piano]]
[[de:Wikipedia:Kandidaten fuer exzellente Artikel]]
| 