Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Schabir Shaik Trial: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
*'''Comment'''. Well written, but I'm a little surprised at the coverage of in-line citations in the article - All <s>31</s> 30 of them are between the first four (excluding the lead-in) sections, and nothing else thereafter. I presume they all covered by the later two references? - [[User:Mailer diablo|Mailer Diablo]] 12:26, 20 December 2005 (UTC) |
*'''Comment'''. Well written, but I'm a little surprised at the coverage of in-line citations in the article - All <s>31</s> 30 of them are between the first four (excluding the lead-in) sections, and nothing else thereafter. I presume they all covered by the later two references? - [[User:Mailer diablo|Mailer Diablo]] 12:26, 20 December 2005 (UTC) |
||
:* Um wait, there are 31 citations but only 30 at the footnotes...did I see something wrong here? - [[User:Mailer diablo|Mailer Diablo]] 12:31, 20 December 2005 (UTC) |
:* Um wait, there are 31 citations but only 30 at the footnotes...did I see something wrong here? - [[User:Mailer diablo|Mailer Diablo]] 12:31, 20 December 2005 (UTC) |
||
: |
:One citation points to the same footnote, and I found it silly to continuously repeat the same footnote when from reading the articles its fairly obvious. {{User:PZFUN/signature}} 20:05, 20 December 2005 (UTC) |
||
Revision as of 20:06, 20 December 2005
Self-nom. I am relising this as I truly believe it deserves to be a featured article. Its first listing received little attention, despite this being one of the most important court trials in South African history. Previous lising is here. User:PZFUN/signature 07:56, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
- Support. Everyking 08:10, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
- Comment. Well written, but I'm a little surprised at the coverage of in-line citations in the article - All
3130 of them are between the first four (excluding the lead-in) sections, and nothing else thereafter. I presume they all covered by the later two references? - Mailer Diablo 12:26, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
- Um wait, there are 31 citations but only 30 at the footnotes...did I see something wrong here? - Mailer Diablo 12:31, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
:One citation points to the same footnote, and I found it silly to continuously repeat the same footnote when from reading the articles its fairly obvious. User:PZFUN/signature 20:05, 20 December 2005 (UTC)