Wikipedia:Peer review/Saddam Hussein/archive1: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
No edit summary |
→[[Saddam Hussein]]: comments |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
===[[Saddam Hussein]]=== |
===[[Saddam Hussein]]=== |
||
Just now read this article and found it amazingly NPOV for such a controversial subject. I think the editors have been admirable in presenting a fair, well detailed, well sourced picture of Saddam, without special pleading. I find current objections to the article in the [[Talk:Saddam Hussein|Talk]] page to be without merit. It has been almost two years since Saddam Hussein was nominated and failed as a [[Featured article]]. I think the time has come to recognize the good work of the editors and renominate, bur wanted to vet it with Peer Review beforehand. — [[User:J M Rice|J M Rice]] 10:36, 21 April 2006 (UTC) |
Just now read this article and found it amazingly NPOV for such a controversial subject. I think the editors have been admirable in presenting a fair, well detailed, well sourced picture of Saddam, without special pleading. I find current objections to the article in the [[Talk:Saddam Hussein|Talk]] page to be without merit. It has been almost two years since Saddam Hussein was nominated and failed as a [[Featured article]]. I think the time has come to recognize the good work of the editors and renominate, bur wanted to vet it with Peer Review beforehand. — [[User:J M Rice|J M Rice]] 10:36, 21 April 2006 (UTC) |
||
:Needs to be shortened- 75kb is really a lot of bloat. I don't think you'll have any success getting it featured while the trial is still a current event (that section needs to be rewritten too btw). [[User:Borisblue|Borisblue]] 14:14, 22 April 2006 (UTC) |
|||
Revision as of 14:14, 22 April 2006
Just now read this article and found it amazingly NPOV for such a controversial subject. I think the editors have been admirable in presenting a fair, well detailed, well sourced picture of Saddam, without special pleading. I find current objections to the article in the Talk page to be without merit. It has been almost two years since Saddam Hussein was nominated and failed as a Featured article. I think the time has come to recognize the good work of the editors and renominate, bur wanted to vet it with Peer Review beforehand. — J M Rice 10:36, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
- Needs to be shortened- 75kb is really a lot of bloat. I don't think you'll have any success getting it featured while the trial is still a current event (that section needs to be rewritten too btw). Borisblue 14:14, 22 April 2006 (UTC)