Wikipedia:Featured article review/Parthenon/archive1

Parthenon

Emsworth nom. Messages left at Classical Greece and Rome and Architecture. Marskell 15:52, 25 April 2007 (UTC) Additional message at Greece. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:12, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Relies on 3 sources, and it has stub sections — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ahadland1234 (talk • contribs)
• I couldn't agree more. There is nothing on the archaic proto-Parthenons, Kallikrates and Iktinos aren't referred to, the design irregularities aren't discussed, nor are the construction methods, the section on sculptural decoration needs significant expansion, and there is next to nothing on the archaeology of the site. I hope to add something soon myself, and I've suggested this page for the architecture collabortion of the month. Twospoonfuls 08:38, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• I recognize the article's problems, and I promise to do my best until Friday to improve its status. Unfortunately, then and for 10 days I'll be unable to work in Wikipedia. WP:GREECE has been informed.--Yannismarou 09:03, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Also some more detailed history of the accounts and the controversy of the Delian funds should be added, and the bibliography isn't really an adequate survey of the literature on the subject. Twospoonfuls 09:36, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• I'll do my best to improve the article until Friday. Then, I will renew my efforts after May 6.--Yannismarou 20:38, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Here's a list of some issues:
  • References (obviously) too few and what's there is not formatted properly.
  • WP:UNITS issues. A lack of non-breaking spaces in measurements, especially in the Design and construction section.
  • There's a gallery.
  • Some of the abbreviations have an s to denote plurality.
  • "The" appears in the section headers (see WP:HEAD).
  • At a quick glance I think there are also some uses of both American and British spelling. Quadzilla99 16:07, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]