Wikipedia:Article Collaboration and Improvement Drive/Removed

30 votes, Nominated March 6, 2007; needs at least 32 votes by May 1, 2007 Overdue

Support

1. bibliomaniac15 01:59, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
2. Blood Red Sandman Open Up Your Heart - Receive My EviLove 07:31, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
3. Lord Metroid 16:42, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
4. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 19:21, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
5. Kidsheaven 19:47, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
6. Anas ^Talk? 13:30, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
7. Fbv65edel / ☑t / ☛c || 21:08, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
8. Duran 21:13, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
9. LordHarris 00:59, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
10. Oberiko 18:13, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
11. DavidYork71 05:26, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
12. semper fictilis 18:48, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
13. Think outside the box 11:36, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
14. Dweller 11:44, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
15. Emperor Walter Humala · ^{( talk? · help! )} 18:20, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
16. Dalf | Talk 22:04, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
17. Twerbrou 10:56, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
18. mirageinred 14:47, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
19. Bossi (talk ;; contribs) 00:08, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
20. Ixistant 15:11, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
21. Flubeca 19:26, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
22. Proabivouac 09:54, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
23. —Dave101→talk→contributions • 21:30, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
24. Timrollpickering 12:01, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
25. Kaiser matias 20:55, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
26. Daniel5127 | Talk 03:53, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
27. BobbyCat 21:38, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
28. Darrenhusted 16:30, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
29. Oneworld25 19:46, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
30. Scorpion⁰⁴²² 22:07, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

• A very influential man in history. I ask you to set aside whatever beliefs you have for this man and think solely about improving the article to the standard it should be at. bibliomaniac15 01:59, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment Agreed as per nom. Lord Metroid 16:42, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• One of the most important parts of 20th century history, should be a high priority and quality.Kidsheaven 19:47, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Among the most globally influential and recognizable historical figures of modern times. Oberiko 18:13, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Great Statesman of mid-20th century EuropeDavidYork71 04:10, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It took a united world to defeat Germany, twice, in the last century.58.163.142.123 03:03, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Also worth noting that according the wikicharts tool it was the 17th most viewed article in January, 21st in Feb. and 17th again in march.

Agreed as per nom. Daniel5127 | Talk 03:53, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

4 votes, Nominated April 18, 2007; needs at least 8 votes by May 2, 2007 Overdue

Support

1. Kaiser matias 05:58, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
2. ck lostsword|^queta!|_Suggestions? 21:38, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
3. 10:50, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
4. bibliomaniac15 22:48, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

• Decided as one of Wikipedia's 200 core biographies, the man who is credited with surgical sterilisation, something that has affected most of our lives, and is only ranked as Start-class. Surely there is more that can be said. Kaiser matias 05:58, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

2 votes, Nominated May 2, 2007; needs at least 4 votes by May 9, 2007 Overdue

Support

1. Aminz 04:46, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
2. Jeltz talk 19:56, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

• I think this is an important article. -Aminz 04:46, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Indeed, this article is in a poor shape and about an important topic too.
• So important, but can definitely use some work.

Jeltz talk 19:56, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

2 votes, Nominated May 10, 2007; needs at least 4 votes by May 17, 2007 Overdue

Support

1. S.dedalus 05:54, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
2. Fbv65edel / ☑t / ☛c || 01:54, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

• Elliott Carter is a really important classical modernist composer who is often considered America’s greatest composer in academic circles. The page is really bad and neglected (It was even nominated for deletion!) Other important modern composers have great pages, for instance Messiaen, so why is this page so stunted? S.dedalus 05:54, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

7 votes, Nominated May 6, 2007; needs at least 8 votes by May 20, 2007 Overdue}

Support

1. YankeeDoodle14 04:13, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
2. Clay 06:37, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
3. Caponer 15:26, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
4. Astrowob 14:55, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
5. Fbv65edel / ☑t / ☛c || 22:34, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
6. User:Thomas.macmillan 11:11, 15 May 2007
7. Ehjort 21:44, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

• For one of the most influental people in western history, his article is remarkably short. It should be expanded and given a more non POV than it has now. YankeeDoodle14 04:13, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
• Well, I wouldn't call this remarkably short, but definitely remarkably undercited. --Fbv65edel / ☑t / ☛c || 22:34, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

1 vote, Nominated May 29, 2007; needs at least 4 votes by June 5, 2007 Overdue

Support

1. Matt.kaner 23:58, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

• (Takemitsu was the most eminent Japanese composer of the 20th century, and I've been working really hard to get this article up to scratch. Nevertheless it's a slow process for one person and if anyone is able to help, I think it would make a great featured article. Despite what you may think there is plenty of academic reference material available on him - look on JSTOR for example if you can, it's just a case of putting it all together into one coherent article.) Matt.kaner 23:58, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

21 votes, Nominated March 20, 2007; needs at least 24 votes by May 1, 2007 Overdue

Support

1. JACOPLANE • 2007-03-20 23:38
2. A Link to the Past (talk) 23:50, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
3. bibliomaniac15 23:53, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
4. Emperor Walter Humala · ^{( talk? · help! )} 18:37, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
5. Hero1701 18:48, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
6. Kevinwong913 01:05, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
7. Ixistant 20:26, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
8. Greeves ^{(talk • contribs)} 22:42, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
9. Bossi (talk ;; contribs) 00:08, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
10. Fbv65edel / ☑t / ☛c || 14:46, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
11. Themcman1 16:10, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
12. Lord Metroid 22:57, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
13. Bifgis 02:34, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
14. Darrenhusted 16:31, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
15. Astrowob 14:36, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
16. Scorpion 19:51, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
17. --Imaginationac (Talk | Edits) 02:28, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
18. Pendo 4 02:02, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
19. Digiwrld1 23:33, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
20. Bifgis 03:09, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
21. Wikada - ^{TALK CONT ISU} 00:42, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

• Seminal gaming company that has a large influence on past/present/future culture. Created icons like Zelda/Mario/Donkey Kong, as well ass the Game Boy, NES, DS, Wii. The article is in dire need of proper references, and would make a good collaboration. Currently rated as B-class. JACOPLANE • 2007-03-20 23:38
• By last check, Nintendo is worth more than $10 billion and has two of the most successful systems in the industry today, one of them being far more successful than any competitors or even non-competitors. - A Link to the Past (talk) 23:50, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • My mistake; they possess >$10 billion. Back when they were in second place to Sony, Microsoft wanted to buy them for $25 billion. And with the DS being more successful than the PS2 in Japan and Europe, and being pretty close in North America, I believe that they would be worth much, much more. - A Link to the Past (talk) 17:09, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• This is one of those articles that you just expect to be GA or higher. Greeves ^{(talk • contribs)} 22:42, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Everyone knows Nintendo. But the article is not great yet. That should not be happening.Pendo4 is here...Look around...hello???...I am here... 02:02, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• I've always thought the Nintendo article should be a candidate for improvement; I've significantly updated the List of Nintendo developers and the Divisions of Nintendo as they are under the Nintendo corporation banner. Digiwrld1 23:33, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

3 votes, Nominated April 21, 2007; needs at least 4 votes by April 28, 2007 Overdue

Support

1. Nydas^(Talk) 09:55, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
2. SpLoT // 05:15, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
3. Daniel11 00:06, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

• A topic of this importance deserves better than this sloppy article. Nydas^(Talk) 09:55, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

5 votes, Nominated April 16, 2007; needs at least 8 votes by April 30, 2007 Overdue

Support

1. ZayZayEM 02:14, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
2. Kaiser matias 09:13, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
3. Zleitzen^(talk) 05:48, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
4. Darrenhusted 18:07, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
5. M&NCenarius 00:18, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

• This is an important anthropological term; but this article is an absolute mess of tabloid, trivia and vanity. I really thing a good, or even featured article could come from this subject if editors worked together on it.ZayZayEM

6 votes, Nominated April 17, 2007; needs at least 8 votes by May 1, 2007 Overdue

Support

1. Scorpion 15:01, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
2. Gran² 15:07, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
3. Alex 23:23, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
4. Twerbrou 14:48, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
5. LordHarris 15:03, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
6. ĞavinŤing 14:40, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

• The article has fallen into bad shape and could use improving. He's a highly notable TV character. -- Scorpion 15:01, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Wasn't this in a past ACID request that was overdue? bibliomaniac15 23:18, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes, it was previously nominated and didn't go through, but I didn't see anything against nominating an article a second time. -- Scorpion 13:27, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Tell anyone on the street "Bart Simpson" and they can tell you who he is. Hes definitely a very influential person who deserves to be "ACIDed" =) ĞavinŤing 14:40, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

6 votes, Nominated May 12, 2007; needs at least 8 votes by May 26, 2007 Overdue

Support

1. Kzrulzuall ^{Talk• Contribs} 01:22, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
2. Fbv65edel / ☑t / ☛c || 22:37, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
3. Sportsjam3 15:36, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
4. Lεmσηflαsh^(t)/_(c) 22:45, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
5. Punkmorten 13:32, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
6. Dictouray 16:58, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

• An extremely popular sport followed by millions... And not even a GA? --Kzrulzuall ^{Talk• Contribs} 01:22, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

2 votes, Nominated May 25, 2007; needs at least 4 votes by June 1, 2007 Overdue

Support

1. •Felix• ^T 19:04, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
2. Dictouray 16:59, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

• A big topic affecting millions of people needs a little help and improvement. •Felix• ^T 19:04, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

2 votes, Nominated May 26, 2007; needs at least 4 votes by June 2, 2007 Overdue

Support

1. Daskill 23:05, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
2. Wl219 08:07, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

• For a character who is a science fiction icon and perhaps a cultural icon, this article could be much better. Daskill 23:05, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

1 vote, Nominated May 28, 2007; needs at least 4 votes by June 4, 2007 Overdue

Support

1. Richy 11:10, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

• (put your reason for nomination) Richy 11:10, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Millions of people around the world go to nightclubs, and have done so for decades, and yet the article is not very good. Needs a lot of work, especially the History Section. There are also no references.

16 votes, Nominated May 3, 2007; needs at least 20 votes by June 7, 2007 Overdue

Support

1. Shrub of power 19:42, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
2. bibliomaniac15 00:51, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
3. YankeeDoodle14 04:13, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
4. Clay 06:36, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
5. kc12286 02:19, 7 May 2007 (UTC)kc12286[reply]
6. Scalene^{•UserPage•Talk•Contributions•Biography•Є•} 08:06, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
7. GDonato (talk) 10:09, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
8. yoyo
9. Wl219 12:31, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
10. S.dedalus 23:20, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
11. Mrmoocow 23:53, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
12. Fbv65e
13. Sportsjam3 17:10, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
14. del / ☑t / ☛c || 22:33, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
15. Oneworld25 05:18, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
16. 02:06, 25 May 2007 (UTC)Alston

Comments

• This is a very important book in terms of literature and social and historical context, but it needs some serious work doing - it contains several lists and very few citations. Would like to do some work, but am very pushed for time at present. Shrub of power 19:42, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

9 votes, Nominated April 21, 2007; needs at least 12 votes by May 12, 2007 Overdue

Support

1. bibliomaniac15 20:55, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
2. —ÅñôñÿMôús _{Dîššíd3nt} 22:00, 21 April 2007 (UTC) This article can make it to Feautured, and it should![reply]
3. Bifgis 03:13, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
4. ♠TomasBat (@)(Contribs)(Sign!) 10:17, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
5. Sir Reginald Aylmer Ranfurly Plunkett-Ernle-Erle-Drax 01:58, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
6. Astrowob 14:08, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
7. Jeltz talk 22:43, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
8. —Zan _orath 08:48, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
9. User:Madris Madris 03:08, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

• This article was a DYK, and shows much promise. Poison was a commonly used tool, and its use has become quite an integral part of history bibliomaniac15 20:55, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

12 votes, Nominated April 15, 2007; needs at least 16 votes by May 13, 2007 Overdue

Support

1. Ezeu 18:16, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
2. LordHarris 14:14, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
3. Dweller 16:01, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
4. Darrenhusted 16:34, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
5. Kaiser matias 09:10, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
6. Zleitzen^(talk) 05:48, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
7. CitiCat 12:53, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
8. BigrTex 14:32, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
9. BanyanTree 03:37, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
10. Timrollpickering 09:06, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
11. njan 20:05, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
12. Scorpion⁰⁴²² 04:05, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

• A figure of historical importance, for many reasons. Potential to be a very interesting article. Edited by relatively few people, needs help to reach GA status. Also, consider the scarcity of Africa related articles with GA status. --Ezeu 18:16, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

5 votes, Nominated April 12, 2007; needs at least 8 votes by April 26, 2007 Overdue

Support

1. Somebody Else's Problem^Cat_Dog(aka Alethiophile) 20:01, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
2. Lord Metroid 21:44, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
3. Twerbrou 12:26, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
4. Darrenhusted 16:33, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
5. Jeltz talk 22:42, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

• This article is extremely controversial and needs to be fixed. The current group that's editing the article is polarized either pro- or anti-Falun Gong, so the article is pretty much locked into its current configuration as any major edit will start an edit war. It's an important issue that affects a lot of people. We need to fix this. Somebody Else's Problem^Cat_Dog(aka Alethiophile) 20:01, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Ohh dear, I never seen so many templates on one page before! Lord Metroid 21:44, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

3 votes, Nominated April 20, 2007; needs at least 4 votes by April 27, 2007 Overdue

Support

1. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 11:27, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
2. LordHarris 15:03, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
3. --Jersey Devil 06:14, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

• April 20, the anniversary of the Ludlow Massacre, seems a good day to nominate this article. This was an important event to organized labor, and should not be forgotten. Needs expansion in terms of description and aftereffects. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 11:27, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

1 vote, Nominated April 23, 2007; needs at least 4 votes by April 30, 2007 Overdue

Support

1. Jersey Devil 05:59, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
2. --Oneworld25 19:44, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

• Article is on the treaty which officially formed the Axis Powers of Germany, Italy and Imperial Japan in the onset of the Second World War. Yet the article has only one link in its external link section. Very little references. An article of this importance needs serious work and should be heavily cited.--Jersey Devil 05:59, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

1 vote, Nominated May 21, 2007; needs at least 4 votes by May 28, 2007 Overdue

Support

1. BlueLotas 23:49, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

• [1] BlueLotas 23:49, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • It's good to fix mistakes where they have been criticized... but, this seems a little too narrow a topic to get many people interested... and it severely limits users by making them go to history journals and books which most people won't have easy access to. gren グレン 11:39, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

6 votes, Nominated May 23, 2007; needs at least 8 votes by June 6, 2007 Overdue

Support

1. jwillbur^talk 00:41, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
2. •Felix• ^T 14:11, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
3. Dalf | Talk 05:08, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
4. Bifgis 20:19, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
5. M&NCenarius 08:51, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
6. ♠Tom@sBat 13:27, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Comments: Looks pretty bad, room for improvement, expansion, and such, doesn't look that long or detailed. Alphablast 21:46, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• You do realise we collaborated on this three weeks ago? CloudNine 15:56, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No I didn't, but it still doesn't look any better. So its best to try again. Alphablast 12:12, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

2 votes, Nominated April 19, 2007; needs at least 4 votes by April 26, 2007 Overdue

Support

1. Zanimum 19:01, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
2. ThePointblank 13:21, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

• The extensive recent press coverage of this article's edit war, twice on CBC Radio Charlottetown, once on CBC TV Charlottetown, on CBC.ca PEI and CBC.ca Manitoba, in the National Post, Montreal Gazette, PEI Guardian, on Canada.com. -- Zanimum 19:01, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• The media circus surrounding the article and the intentions of the various editors is enough. As I said on the article's talk page, we as a collective whole as editors and contributors have to demonstrate we can produce articles that are excellent sources of information, that are reliable, non-biased, and ones as a whole, the community can be proud of, and we can use the media attention to show we can produce such article. ThePointblank 13:21, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

3 votes, Nominated May 11, 2007; needs at least 4 votes by May 18, 2007 Overdue

Support

1. Cat ^chi? 10:50, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
2. Crushti 19:26, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
3. Ehjort 21:43, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

• The series of protest are among the largest in Turkish history as well as human history. Mind you, this article is about a current event that has been going on for the past month. There have already been 4 rallies and a 5th one is scheduled for this weekend, another is scheduled for 19 May. It is very overwhelming for a single person to try to maintain this article and I would welcome any assistance. When the rallies come to an end, I hope to have a near feature article. It will be very hard to write about the protests once they conclude. It would loose the historic perspective too. -- Cat ^chi? 10:50, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

10 votes, Nominated May 8, 2007; needs at least 12 votes by May 29, 2007 Overdue

Support

1. Wl219 06:48, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
2. Mike Serfas 22:46, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
3. CJ 17:49, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
4. Fbv65edel / ☑t / ☛c || 22:35, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
5. bibliomaniac15 00:12, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
6. Caponer 16:33, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
7. Sportsjam3 17:02, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
8. Flubeca t 16:36, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
9. Oneworld25 05:19, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
10. Dalf | Talk 05:02, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

• This article was recently demoted from featured article status due to a lack of citations. I think that can be pretty easily fixed given the amount of legal scholarship that's been written about it in the last 150 years. Wl219 06:48, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

10 votes, Nominated April 3, 2007; needs at least 12 votes by April 24, 2007 Overdue

Support

1. Thedreamdied 01:51, 3 April 2007 (UTC) i'm the nominator.[reply]
2. Tekaphor 07:26, 3 April 2007 (UTC) Good idea.[reply]
3. AvB ÷ talk 10:08, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
4. bibliomaniac15 00:27, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
5. Guido den Broeder 01:10, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
6. Citicat 02:41, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
7. JFW | T@lk 21:18, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
8. Renwick 01:46, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
9. Feyandstrange 03:51, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
10. SadanYagci 03:52, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

• The article about ME/CFS is unbelievably poor. This disease, whatever your personal opinion on it, is known to affect 4 million americans and around 1 in 1000 people in Western populations. However, the article is unbelievably long, full of useless and biased information and as a resource is pretty poor. There are also continuing and unresolved arguments over lots of the information, and information about research and upcoming clinical trials, for instance, is mentioned either sparingly or not at all. This article may not interest you personally, but it is important that it is thoroughly improved to make it useful to the public. Please vote! Thedreamdied 01:51, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Last time I looked (admittedly years ago) the US estimate was 800,000 patients so I think I detect definition/dx criteria creep (not suggesting Thedreamdied is responsible for that; increasingly inclusive diagnostic criteria is seen as a big problem in ME/CFS advocacy). AvB ÷ talk 10:08, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I was going on the CDC estimate in their recent cfs public information drive, which said 4 million. Thedreamdied 13:48, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The CDC have different estimates in different publications. 800,000 sounds about right for the Fukuda definition. More accurate diagnosing should (more quickly) eliminate other diseases than ME from the CFS population and thereby reduce this number. I agree that the article is presently a total mess, it is more a collection of 'my two cents' bits than a proper lemma.--Guido den Broeder 01:10, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• The article is presently filled with poorly verified information added by people with an agenda. We need to be crystal clear on what can be included and what is out. I suggest small case series that have never been cited by a systematic review are not suitable.

In general I agree however I think that leaves out some very promising recent research such as this small study http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?CMD=search&DB=pubmed Renwick 01:46, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

JFW | T@lk 21:18, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Creating a separate article on ME could help sorting things out, IMHO. The text as it is shows a lot of confusion about the relations between a number of entities. The related lemma on Post-viral fatigue syndrome also needs work.--Guido den Broeder 23:59, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You think so? It seems to me that they're all the same thing with different names - hence 'CFS/ME' in the US. Thedreamdied 00:05, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Having separate articles for ME and PVFS could confuse things even more, a ME or PVFS diagnosis isn't based on diagnostic tests that distinguish them from CFS, but perhaps the difference between chronic fatigue and CFS needs to be further highlighted. - Tekaphor 06:26, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

They're not quite the same, although they target the same patients. ME is a disease, CFS a syndrome. In practice this means that all ME-patients have CFS, while the diagnosis of CFS is (or should be) a temporary thing until it is established that the patient has ME, or not. Furthermore, some aspects of ME are typically not included in CFS criteria, and there is a long history of ME research from before CFS was even invented. Diagnosing ME is also quite different from diagnosing CFS.--Guido den Broeder 09:31, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Tekaphor. To me, ME and CFS are broadly different words for the same thing, and thats how they are intended. Chronic Fatigue by itself is a totally different thing, its a symptom and not a disease. Thedreamdied 15:18, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• The article is too large, somewhat fragmented and needs more references for the controversial aspects of it. - Tekaphor 06:26, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think that its FAR too large - it should be divided up into other articles if necessary, similar to the Multiple Sclerosis article. There also needs to be a much better lead, and the endless 'sniping' where one POV is followed by another is ridiculous. The article should be written from the POV that CFS is real, then there should be a clear section suggesting that some people/doctors believe it isnt. The etiology section is also appalling - the only serious etiologys are "its all in the head", "it doesnt exist at all", gene/immune problems, and persistent low grade viral infections. All the other rubbish is unsourced and really unneccessary. Thedreamdied 15:18, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A lot of the stuff in the etiology section may be useful but should be moved to a section called differential diagnosis/diseases with similar symptoms or something (which I think a lot of medical articles on rare/ hard to diagnose diseases should add). Celiac disease and arnold chiari malformation may cause similar symptoms but are definitely not the same thing as CFS/ME, they have their own articles and they do not need a lot of elaboration on the CFS/ME page. Also treatments should be listed in a single section not spead out in the etiology section- treatments for diseases such as celiac disease, allergies, etc. are already mentioned on their respective pages and shouldn't be on the CFS page at all. This section also lists tests such as testing for herpes virus/epstein barr virus, these should be moved to the testing/diagnosis section. Renwick 01:46, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is also enough immunology information to warrant its own subsection. - Tekaphor 03:25, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re-Renwick, i do see why it the etiology stuff should be kept, but maybe a seperate article on 'Chronic Fatigue' could have them, and then keep CFS/ME as a seperate page relating only to seriously proposed etiologies. Thedreamdied 13:13, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps the relevant information can be "strained" out and the rest deleted. - Tekaphor 15:06, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Any additions of information, removals of bad information, and anything else that could help a person understand the illness is greatly needed. Also, editing, fact checking, etc... SadanYagci 03:52, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

2 votes, Nominated May 17, 2007; needs at least 4 votes by May 24, 2007 Overdue

Support

1. Lεmσηflαsh^(t)/_(c) 22:33, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
2. Sportsjam3 17:05, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

• Topic that is searched on alot, so we need to add more information. Lεmσηflαsh^(t)/_(c) 22:33, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• By the way, this article is also a Featured Article Candidate. Universe=atom^{•Talk•Contributions•} 15:29, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

5 votes, Nominated May 25, 2007; needs at least 8 votes by June 8, 2007 Overdue

Support

1. SunStar Net ^talk 18:04, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
2. Dictouray 17:04, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
3. --Belazzur 08:34, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
4. M&NCenarius 08:52, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
5. Universe=atom^{•Talk•Contributions•} 16:52, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

• This is an article that is in decent shape so far, and is of personal interest to me for two reasons:
  

1. I studied this in my GCSE geography.
2. It was also the subject of ITV's Police, Camera, Action! in the 1996 episode The Man Who Shot OJ Programme 2, about the Los Angeles News Service.
Any help would be appreciated if you can: I would like this to be the Featured Article one day. If you want to help me or have any questions, leave a note on my talk page SunStar Net ^talk 18:04, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

2 votes, Nominated June 14, 2007; needs at least 4 votes by June 21, 2007 Overdue

Support

1. ZeWrestler ^Talk 23:42, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
2. Hydrogen Iodide 01:12, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

• Very basic fundamental concept in Geography. There should be a plethora of information online for us to raise it to featured article status. ZeWrestler ^Talk 23:42, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

2 votes, Nominated April 17, 2007; needs at least 4 votes by April 24, 2007 Overdue

Support

1. BenB4 07:24, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
2. Dalf | Talk 21:25, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

• An important subject of considerable relevance to the problems of energy dependence and climate change. BenB4 07:24, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

6 votes, Nominated May 10, 2007; needs at least 8 votes by May 24, 2007 Overdue

Support

1. Madris 02:58, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
2. SpLoT // 09:58, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
3. Sportsjam3 15:29, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
4. YankeeDoodle14 19:53, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
5. Punkmorten 13:32, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
6. Oneworld25 05:23, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

• I feel that such an important component in biology, human development, and geology needs a more in depth article on its biological role and especially its use in human historyMadris 02:58, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• It gave its name to a whole age, so is historically crucial and should be better than B-class.
• If this isn't in Wikipedia, then the whole periodic table should be thrown out if that's what taking this article out means. Iron is such an important part of human construction. I cannot believe this could be gone.

5 votes, Nominated April 14, 2007; needs at least 8 votes by April 28, 2007 Overdue

Support

1. CloudNine 11:58, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
2. ZayZayEM 10:05, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
3. Thedreamdied 13:53, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
4. Jeltz talk 18:17, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
5. Derwig 20:20, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

• The article name might need improving (Tool or technology?), but this is an important subject to cover. Species, apart from humans, can utilise simple tools. Information on this is spread throughout Wikipedia though, and there's no article to summarise this. CloudNine 11:58, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• It might help to have a proper link to an article first. All I see is a redlink. Kaiser matias 23:42, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Note that this is the Article Creation and Improvement Drive :). I might be able to write a quick stub though. CloudNine 19:39, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Yes! We need to know what they are up to. I like the usage of "technology" as opposed to tools (covers farming and construction as well as just tools).--ZayZayEM 10:05, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Sounds good, although i'm wondering if this article doesn't already exist under another name. Thedreamdied 13:53, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yeah. thinking the same thing but the Technology article links to this one. Jeltz talk 18:17, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• I've searched through Wikipedia, and can't find anything that covers the same subject. CloudNine 19:39, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Also Animal cognition#Tool and weapon use, and Category:Tool-using species — Jack · talk · 06:14, Wednesday, 25 April 2007

Tool also covers this subject. -- Beland 22:23, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

12 votes, Nominated May 8, 2007; needs at least 16 votes by June 5, 2007 Overdue

Support

1. Gutworth 02:50, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
2. Fbv65edel / ☑t / ☛c || 03:00, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
3. Jeltz talk 22:36, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
4. bibliomaniac15 22:55, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
5. Guy Fuchsia 14:22, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
6. User:Madris Madris 03:08, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
7. Mrmoocow 23:49, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
8. - Flubeca t 19:09, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
9. Lεmσηflαsh^(t)/_(c) 22:44, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
10. ${\displaystyle \sim }$  Lenoxus " * " 15:21, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
11. ZeWrestler ^Talk 14:04, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
12. •Felix• ^T 17:36, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

• This article is currently reffered to by Mediawiki:Loginend and right now has 3 tags on top. This article needs help! Gutworth 02:50, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • I myself found the article through Loginend and realized that it is getting major exposure of a sort we don't always think about (rather than being a really popular topic in its own right). ${\displaystyle \sim }$  Lenoxus " * " 15:21, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

9 votes, Nominated April 12, 2007; needs at least 12 votes by May 3, 2007 Overdue

Support

1. — Jack · talk · 17:35, Thursday, 12 April 2007
2. Eureka! bibliomaniac15 21:43, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
3. — Pious7_Talk^Contribs 21:44, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
4. M&NCenarius 19:38, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
5. LordHarris 14:14, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
6. Astrowob 17:19, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
7. Coemgenus 13:38, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
8. Diez2 16:01, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
9. ²¹⁰physicq (c) 00:39, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

• To say this state is the third largest, most populous, largest economic power in the US, the article ain't up to scratch. International powerhouse in terms of music, film and electronics — Jack · talk · 17:35, Thursday, 12 April 2007

4 votes, Nominated April 20, 2007; needs at least 8 votes by May 4, 2007 Overdue

Support

1. Felixboy 14:47, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
2. Astrowob 17:19, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
3. LordHarris 15:03, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
4. M&NCenarius 00:20, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

• Lacking in areas compared to articles on other cities of its size. Already have to-do list and peer review. Felixboy 14:48, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

14 votes, Nominated May 7, 2007; needs at least 16 votes by June 4, 2007 Overdue

Support

1. Adam78 10:53, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
2. Wl219 13:04, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
3. Astrowob 14:56, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
4. Dami 19:42, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
5. – Alensha ^talk 19:44, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
6. Fbv65edel / ☑t / ☛c || 01:56, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
7. Mrmoocow 23:52, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
8. as extremely interesting. Punkmorten 13:32, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
9. - Flubeca t 21:14, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
10. gren グレン 11:36, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
11. Dalf | Talk 04:59, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
12. Bifgis 20:15, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
13. Kurykh 03:04, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
14. Universe=atom^{•Talk•Contributions•} 17:02, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

• It could be a really useful article to review the major geopolitical changes of the 20th-21st centuries. There are blanks in the knowledge of all of us (for example, it was a surprise to me that a country named Eritrea exists – because it wasn't until 1993 that it was created and it was just missing from my atlas) and it would be interesting to see how the worldscape differed from the present one just a couple of decades ago and how it changed over time to reach its today's state. There are useful articles available as resources in its "See also" section. Adam78 10:53, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Seems interesting. Wl219 13:04, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Very good article idea. Astrowob 14:56, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• This is really cool. I'd definitely love to help. --Fbv65edel / ☑t / ☛c || 01:56, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• I remember, say two years ago, seeing some incredibly successful article collaborations which I rarely see today. I think it was because there was lots of information available both online or already on Wikipedia. Although this isn't the greatest topic, I think it's a great one for collaboration because it doesn't require specialty sources. gren グレン 11:36, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• A really cool topic. :) Universe=atom^{•Talk•Contributions•} 17:02, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

14 votes, Nominated April 19, 2007; needs at least 16 votes by May 17, 2007 Overdue

Support

1. Twerbrou 14:47, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
2. Kaiser matias 21:34, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
3. Dalf | Talk 03:54, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
4. Astrowob 17:20, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
5. Coemgenus 13:40, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
6. ~ BigrTex 14:32, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
7. M&NCenarius 00:19, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
8. bibliomaniac15 00:37, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
9. Flubeca 19:09, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
10. Caponer 15:25, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
11. --ISOLA'd ELBA 23:40, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
12. Felix 12:27, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
13. Mrmoocow 23:55, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
14. Fbv65edel / ☑t / ☛c || 22:32, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

• Page of an important country, which has a lot of spelling and grammatical problems, and the history part (that's the furthest I got) goes over huge times of history in one giant leap. Why where they together with Lithuania and why was that bond dissolved, for instance. Twerbrou 14:47, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

6 votes, Nominated May 2, 2007; needs at least 8 votes by May 16, 2007 Overdue

Support

1. ↔NMajdan•talk 15:06, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
2. Okiefromokla 22:55, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
3. BigrTex 14:59, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
4. Patricknoddy^{TALK (reply here)|HISTORY} 11:27, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
5. Astrowob 14:54, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
6. Fbv65edel / ☑t / ☛c || 22:33, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

• The Oklahoma Centennial is on November 16 of this year and it would be great if this article was improved to Featured status by that day.↔NMajdan•talk 15:06, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

1 vote, Nominated May 18, 2007; needs at least 4 votes by May 25, 2007 Overdue

Support

1. Punkmorten 13:32, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

• POV-ridden throughout edit history. Worth working on as an interesting and important phenomenon. Punkmorten 13:32, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

1 vote, Nominated May 26, 2007; needs at least 4 votes by June 2, 2007 Overdue

Support

1. Alphablast 20:21, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

• We need this a FA so badly, its a city, and the article is in need of major improvement, so it can be included in the CD selection or even just get it to GA, so we need a team that can work on the information from Wikipedia:Peer review/Sunderland and Wikipedia:Peer review/Sunderland 2. Alphablast 20:21, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

3 votes, Nominated May 19, 2007; needs at least 4 votes by May 26, 2007 Overdue

Support

1. Punkmorten 18:15, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
2. •Felix• ^T 18:53, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
3. Dictouray 21:49, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

• Horrid article, capital city and thus rated as top-importance. Punkmorten 18:15, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've never seen a capital city article in condition this bad! •Felix• ^T 18:53, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

1 vote, Nominated May 25, 2007; needs at least 4 votes by June 1, 2007 Overdue

Support

1. Billy227, Review my account!! ^{talk contribs sndbx usbx} 01:28, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

• A pretty good article currently. Needs expansions and some more citations. A picture gallery would probably be good too. Overall, needs some improvement. -Billy227, Review my account!! ^{talk contribs sndbx usbx} 01:28, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

3 votes, Nominated April 18, 2007; needs at least 4 votes by April 25, 2007 Overdue

Support

1. Salix alba (talk) 23:34, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
2. SpLoT // 11:19, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
3. bibliomaniac15 04:33, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

• A rather unsexy topic with a very rich history going back to the dawn of time. So much could be said and so little has been. --Salix alba (talk) 23:34, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

4 votes, Nominated May 7, 2007; needs at least 8 votes by May 21, 2007 Overdue

Support

1. Guy Fuchsia 23:53, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
2. SpLoT // 09:57, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
3. Mrmoocow 23:50, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
4. Fbv65edel / ☑t / ☛c || 22:35, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

• It's absurd how underdeveloped this article is, considering how well-known the topic is. I imagine anyone with even the slightest understanding of casinos could easily find something to add or reference. Guy Fuchsia 23:53, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

12 votes, Nominated April 5, 2007; needs at least 16 votes by May 3, 2007 Overdue

Support

1. bibliomaniac15 01:47, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
2. Dalf | Talk 22:02, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
3. M&NCenarius 22:08, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
4. KZ^{Talk• Contribs} 07:37, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
5. Themcman1 15:41, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
6. Flubeca 15:43, 7 April 2007 (UTC) I saw a documentary on pandas. It's a subject needing FA status[reply]
7. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 06:21, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
8. Darrenhusted 16:32, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
9. Kaiser matias 09:13, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
10. Astrowob 14:45, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
11. Brisvegas 02:29, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
12. —ÅñôñÿMôús _{Dîššíd3nt} 03:42, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

• The Giant Panda is one of the most beloved animals, even reaching up to enter the logo of the WWF. A collaboration should be done. bibliomaniac15 01:47, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

5 votes, Nominated April 28, 2007; needs at least 8 votes by May 12, 2007 Overdue

Support

1. Ilse@ 13:40, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
2. Stlemur 16:35, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
3. Daniel11 22:13, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
4. Felixboy 20:44, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
5. Jeltz talk 22:40, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

• Worldwide export beer, but little information on Wikipedia. – Ilse@ 13:40, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Not sure how much you can say about the beer itself; rewrite what's there, add a few bits and pieces, and merge into Heineken International? --Stlemur 16:35, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• I think the company, its subsidiaries (e.g. Brand, Wieckse Witte in NL) deserve some more. I agree with Stlemur the Heineken and Heineken Intnl should be merged, IMHO as Heineken, with a redirect from Heineken Intnl. Arnoutf 18:08, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Heineken International is the general article about the multinational with something like 120 brands,
    Heineken Pilsener about the lager beer. – Ilse@ 18:37, 28 April 2007 (UTC) (minor change Ilse@ 07:19, 8 May 2007 (UTC))[reply]
• Support but I am proposing a mrege. Felixboy 20:44, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

3 votes, Nominated May 16, 2007; needs at least 4 votes by May 23, 2007 Overdue

Support

1. Ixistant 00:09, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
2. Punkmorten 13:32, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
3. Ehjort 21:42, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

• For such an important, world renowned magazine, it sure does have a pretty dismal wiki entry. Should DEFINATELY be worked on for FA status! Ixistant 00:09, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

1 vote, Nominated May 16, 2007; needs at least 4 votes by May 23, 2007 Overdue

Support

1. - Flubeca t 19:15, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

• The weapon used in the united states for lots of wars, and is only a start article - Flubeca t 19:15, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

2 votes, Nominated May 17, 2007; needs at least 4 votes by May 24, 2007 Overdue

Support

1. ***Clamster 23:08, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
2. Mrmoocow 00:17, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

• Book series by Lemony Snicket with thirteen books and a handful of spin-off books. The article is plagued by speculation and unsourced statements. Hopefully, it can be brought up to par with Harry Potter, a similar type of series. This page and other closely related pages are primarily edited by users who have read and are fans of the books. Some input from those less familar with the series would be very helpful. ***Clamster 23:08, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Just a note here again, I've started a to-do list with some suggestions of improving the article. Anyway, I support. Mrmoocow 00:17, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

7 votes, Nominated May 11, 2007; needs at least 8 votes by May 25, 2007 Overdue

Support

1. →EdGl 22:31, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
2. Mrmoocow
3. RttM 17:29, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
4. M&NCenarius 17:58, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
5. Fbv65edel / ☑t / ☛c || 22:36, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
6. Jeltz talk 21:03, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
7. Bifgis 20:17, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

• Pop culture references make up more than half of the article! →EdGl 22:31, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

6 votes, Nominated May 18, 2007; needs at least 8 votes by June 1, 2007 Overdue

Support

1. ***Clamster 20:35, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
2. Jeltz talk 21:02, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
3. - Flubeca t 21:11, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
4. Lεmσηflαsh^(t)/_(c) 00:32, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
5. Brisvegas 11:21, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
6. SpLoT // 14:02, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

• For such a common item, the page is fairly short and very disorganized. ***Clamster 20:35, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• I was thinking the same thing - Flubeca t 21:11, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• So was I. Lεmσηflαsh^(t)/_(c) 00:32, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• I like it. It's quirky yet practical. Brisvegas 11:21, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

6 votes, Nominated May 22, 2007; needs at least 8 votes by June 5, 2007 Overdue

Support

1. Telcourbanio 13:29, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
2. Dalf | Talk 05:04, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
3. --Richy 11:12, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
4. Doppelganger 17:17, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
5. SpLoT // 14:02, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
6. ♠Tom@sBat 21:42, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

• It is a well known notable drink, and basically the article has seemed to have been left to rot with hardly any refs, and needing heavy cleanup and a number of other improvements. It is having a peer review, (which is being blatantly ignored), and generally a task force of users is needed to get it to GA. Telcourbanio Care for a talk? 13:29, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]