The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was not promoted by GrahamColm 10:01, 23 November 2013 (UTC) [1].[reply]


For Whom the Sleigh Bell Tolls[edit]

For Whom the Sleigh Bell Tolls (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Nominator(s): Robert Been (talk) 16:49, 17 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating this for featured article because it should be a featured article. So far it looks good for a featured article. Robert Been (talk) 16:49, 17 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • In fact, the editor's only contributions have been the three edits necessary to list this article for FAC. I've got prose and sourcing concerns, but it's very tempting to call for a closure here on procedural grounds. Squeamish Ossifrage (talk) 16:58, 19 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • It needs a thorough copy edit and some expansion on terms that lack context, including "3.1 rating in the 18–49 demographic". What is a 3.1 rating? The content is sparse and not even through what would be a normally shakey Good Article pass, I cannot find any reason that this is worthy of featured status by numerous criteria aside from the all important 1a. 209.255.230.32 (talk) 13:02, 20 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose on 1a and the fact that a non-contributor is unlikely to be able to bring this article up to the required standard Jimfbleak - talk to me? 17:02, 20 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.