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

The article was delisted by Nikkimaria via FACBot (talk) 1:11, 3 April 2021 (UTC) [1].

Alain Prost[edit]

Notified: Koppite1, Leftism, Aprithvi, MWright96, 66.192.104.13, HoldenV8, WP Biography, WP Motorsport, WP Formula One, WP France, 2020-12-16

Review section[edit]

This 2006 promotion has issues with both the featured article criteria the BLP guidelines. There is substantial uncited text, as well as the use of blatantly unreliable sources such as "ecelebritymirror" and "ecelebrityspy". This article needs very substantial work to meet the criteria. Hog Farm Talk 19:12, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

After further thought, I decided not to notify the IP or HoldenV8. The IP is registered to a school, and HoldenV8 (and their sock) have been indeffed for years. Hog Farm Talk 19:26, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Agree this is not up to snuff. As noted by nominator some sources look unreliable and furthermore, the formatting of the sources section is inconsistent and hard to follow. That alone is going to be a major undertaking to resolve. The text needs a good CE as well; for example, some of the coverage of the dispute with Senna doesn't come across as neutral to me, and there are extensive dupe links. Coverage seems superficial with most seasons of his driving career, including his first championship winning season, only covered by a single paragraph (although I appreciate with his long F1 career it might be tricky to get a balance between comprehensiveness and excessive detail). Similarly, the section on Prost Grand Prix seems superficial to me; there no mention of its performance in 2001. Zawed (talk) 21:55, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
With regards to the level of coverage I think a summary style is necessary as the seasons, races, cars, and teams all have their own articles which can be linked to. A focus needs to be maintained on Prost himself and not other topics which should be covered elsewhere. Otherwise this article clearly needs a lot of work. Some of the material seems to be editorialising and some of the sources seem inappropriate. HumanBodyPiloter5 (talk) 08:02, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

FARC section[edit]

Issues raised in the review section include sourcing, prose and coverage. Nikkimaria (talk) 14:46, 20 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
More