Conservapedia:Featured articles/Past Nominations 08-09

Conservapedia:Featured articles

Past Nominations

The following articles were proposed and determined not to be suitable for featuring. If the article has been improved to the point where it is of sufficient quality to be featured, move it back to Proposed for Featuring. Click the show link after each entry to see why it was rejected.

21 March 2009 (EDT)

Riemann integral

Agree. A math article with detailed explanation and examples. -Foxtrot 18:27, 1 March 2009 (EST)
Disagree. It is certainly detailed, but seems to explain things at a fairly advanced level (but that is a non-math person speaking). Also, items that seem necessary for the proof (Square pyramidal numbers, etc) are redlinks. --KotomiT^nandeyanen? 07:24, 18 March 2009 (EDT)
Disagree. --DeanS^talk 10:46, 30 March 2009 (EDT)
Disagree. --â®K_/Admin^/Talk 14:07, 2 April 2009 (EDT)

Colorado Springs
Disagree. Too short. Too many red links. TonyT 12:40, 16 June 2008 (EDT) Disagree. Too short; a good start but needs more info; too many red links. Taj 21:21, 14 July 2008 (EDT) Disagree. Too short. Philip J. Rayment 10:29, 7 September 2008 (EDT) Disagree. --User:JoaquÃn MartÃnez, talk 10:09, 12 September 2008 (EDT)

Johns Hopkins University
Disagree. Too short. TonyT 12:40, 16 June 2008 (EDT) Disagree. Underdeveloped. Foxtrot 22:01, 14 July 2008 (EDT) Disagree Unfortunately this article is far too short to feature at this time. Geoff Plourde^Complain! 19:35, 1 September 2008 (EDT) Disagree. Too short. Philip J. Rayment 10:29, 7 September 2008 (EDT)

Amused To Death

Disagree. Unimportant topic and drug influenced album. This isn't Wikipedia. TonyT 12:40, 16 June 2008 (EDT)
Disagree. --User:JoaquÃn MartÃnez, talk 10:10, 12 September 2008 (EDT)
Disagree. Poorly written, unimportant topic. Serious rewrite needed before featuring. #1denverfan 19:32, 24 September 2008 (EDT)
Disagree. --DeanS^talk 19:49, 24 September 2008 (EDT)
Disagree, per what #1denverfan said. Philip J. Rayment 06:13, 25 September 2008 (EDT)

Battle of Gettysburg

Disagree; I do not feel that this article fully covers the battle, particularly the 20th Maine. Geoff Plourde^Complain! 00:06, 14 September 2008 (EDT)
Agree. -Foxtrot 00:08, 28 September 2008 (EDT)
Agree. --DeanS^talk 00:16, 28 September 2008 (EDT)
Disagree; I do not think that public domain material from the U.S. government should be featured material (such as country articles, ship articles, etc) unless the article has been extensively re-worked by any of the editors to make it better. Mexico (see above) may fall into that category. Karajou 01:06, 28 September 2008 (EDT)
Disagree, for the same reason as Karajou, and in fact we rejected this article once before for the same reason, so I'm moving it to the "Past nominations" section now. Now that we have that "Past nominations" sections, hopefully this won't happen again with this article.

Sausage

Disagree. Too short. Too many red links. TonyT 12:40, 16 June 2008 (EDT)
Disagree. No references despite questionable statements and too many red links. I don't think the length is a problem. Philip J. Rayment
Disagree. Nothing against sausages, but hardly a front page Big Theme. Bugler 07:00, 25 September 2008 (EDT)
Disagree. Too short. Too many red links. --DeanS^talk 20:09, 1 October 2008 (EDT)
Disagree. User:JoaquÃn MartÃnez

Deconstruction

Disagree. Unimportant topic of interest mostly to liberals. TonyT 12:40, 16 June 2008 (EDT)
Disagree. Important topic, but not described correctly. Article contains at least one contradiction ("reader response" both wrong and right). --Ed Poor ^Talk 16:40, 2 July 2008 (EDT)
Agree. --User:JoaquÃn MartÃnez, talk 09:14, 26 August 2008 (EDT) Fixed red links and improved. --User:JoaquÃn MartÃnez, talk 00:16, 3 October 2008 (EDT)
Disagree. I'm not qualified to judge it's accuracy, but it is too obscure and not written at a suitable level. Philip J. Rayment 10:24, 7 September 2008 (EDT)
Disagree. Not long enough, too many red links, not nearly enough images that explain the text, I just didn't understand what was going on in that article. JY23 21:31, 28 September 2008 (EDT)
Disagree. --DeanS^talk 14:01, 19 October 2008 (EDT)

Holy Days

Disagree. Too short. Too many red links. TonyT 12:40, 16 June 2008 (EDT)
Disagree. Too short. Philip J. Rayment 10:29, 7 September 2008 (EDT)
Agree, will be improved. --User:JoaquÃn MartÃnez, talk 09:21, 8 September 2008 (EDT)
Disagree, too short, far too many red links JY23 18:31, 17 September 2008 (EDT)
Neutral. Would like to see what it looks like after more information added; it could be a good article. Learn together 16:02, 8 October 2008 (EDT)
Disagree for now. --DeanS^talk 14:01, 19 October 2008 (EDT)
Disagree Geoff Plourde^Complain! 21:44, 21 October 2008 (EDT)

Liberty Bell
Agree. Taj 22:36, 7 August 2008 (EDT) Disagree. Essential topic, but far too short. Anything about the history of the Bell that someone can put? JY23 21:37, 28 September 2008 (EDT) Disagree. --DeanS^talk 01:22, 22 October 2008 (EDT)

Vitamin C

Agree. Taj 22:36, 7 August 2008 (EDT)
~~Agree. Didn't realize I had to voice agreement when I added it to the list. -Foxtrot 00:08, 28 September 2008 (EDT)~~ Disagree. Now that the copywritten text has been removed this article is hardly as comprehensive. -Foxtrot 21:06, 24 October 2008 (EDT)
Disagree Geoff Plourde^Complain! 21:44, 21 October 2008 (EDT)
Disagree-hardly a good theme and way too short. Far too many red links. Duncan^talk 10:42, 23 October 2008 (EDT)

Operation Iraqi Freedom
Agree. -Foxtrot 00:08, 28 September 2008 (EDT) Agree. Good length, citations, and images. DuncanB 21:28, 2 October 2008 (EDT) Agree. --DeanS^talk 01:22, 22 October 2008 (EDT) Agree. --TK 05:56, 3 December 2008 (EST) Disagree

Alger Hiss
Agree. Found very informative, anti-Communist topic, but far too many red links. #1denverfan 19:31, 24 September 2008 (EDT) Disagree. --DeanS^talk 11:00, 28 November 2008 (EST) Disagree. A bit more work, will do it. --TK 05:56, 3 December 2008 (EST)

Physics
Agree. Haven't had a science article in a while and this one seems fairly well-developed. -Foxtrot 00:00, 22 October 2008 (EDT) Disagree. --DeanS^talk 01:22, 22 October 2008 (EDT) Disagree-- red links. Duncan^Talk 07:31, 15 November 2008 (EST) Disagree. Too many red links for a featured article. --â®K^/Talk! 13:34, 5 December 2008 (EST)

Bible history
Neutral. Fix the redlinks and it would be a good article, but the section lengths need some work. JY23 17:28, 16 November 2008 (EST) Disagree. --DeanS^talk 11:00, 28 November 2008 (EST)

Robert Heinlein
Disagree. One section, no photos, unimportant topic. JY23 17:21, 7 November 2008 (EST) Disagree. Way too short; I agree with JY23.Duncan^Talk 07:31, 15 November 2008 (EST) Disagree. --DeanS^talk 11:00, 28 November 2008 (EST) Disagree. --â®K^/Talk! 13:34, 5 December 2008 (EST)

KAL 007 Survivors and the Forced Labor Concentration Camps of the Russian Federation

Disagree. Reads like an essay, possibly should be moved to essay section. JY23 18:54, 12 November 2008 (EST)
Disagree. --DeanS^talk 11:00, 28 November 2008 (EST)
Disagree. I think this was on Main Page before. --â®K^/Talk! 13:34, 5 December 2008 (EST)
Agree, of course. This was not on main page. This was - Korean Airlines Flight 007. I think the remark above about this reading like an essay may be right. I just don't know the exact line between "essay" and "article". Can there be a "featured essay" as a "featured article"

A-7 Corsair II
Disagree. Reads too much like a schematic. -Foxtrot 18:26, 12 March 2009 (EDT) Disagree. Not a bad article per se, but not convinced it is worthy of front page. Maybe with an expansion of the history of the plane? --KotomiT^nandeyanen? 06:30, 17 March 2009 (EDT) Disagree. --DeanS^talk 07:18, 21 March 2009 (EDT)

Nancy Pelosi
* Agree:----Jpatt 11:33, 15 December 2009 (EST) * Disagree:----too long winded and out of date; needs to be trimmed and focused on House RJJensen 13:20, 15 December 2009 (EST)