Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Elvis Presley/archive1

Elvis Presley

Very good article, should be featured. Arniep 19:41, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

• Object - On a skim through, I noticed that the "Elvis Cult" section consists of one single MASSIVE and practically unreadable paragraph. Unacceptable. Fieari 19:52, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

OK, since I'm the idiot that suggested this article should be nominated, I might as well try to get some work done. I'll start with this point. Just so everyone knows so not >=2 persons try to fix this point (yes, I am a newb...) 81.170.138.232 21:41, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

• Object - 1) Multiple unsourced claims tagged in the article (look for {{fact}} or {{citation needed}} templates) need proper citations. 2) Embedded HTML links need to be converted into full citations as per WP:CITE. 3) The long trivia section needs its contents referenced and properly incorporated into the article prose. --Allen3 ^talk 20:09, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment: No, the great majority of the [acknowledged] trivia needs to be deleted. A considerable amount of unacknowledged trivia needs to be deleted too. However, trivia about Presley has vociferous defenders among editors of this sorry article. -- Hoary 03:52, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
• Comment - ummm..it's got a big 'cleanup' tag in the middle...Cas Liber 20:59, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

It was added because of Fiearis "objection".81.170.138.232 21:44, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

• Object per above. Rlevse 21:35, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
• Object This is the kind of article that lessens Wiki's credibility. I've been comparing it to other articles about entertainers such as John Lennon and this article doesn't just pale in the comparison, it runs and hides. Lochdale 22:48, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
• Support - However, well-sourced parts of the article are frequently deleted by User:Lochdale, simply because they are not in line with Lochdale's personal view. See his contribution history from the beginning. Onefortyone 01:10, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
• Object Not even close IMO. This is one of the most poorly written and biased articles I've ever seen. And the apparent focus on the details of his sex-life is distrubing to say the least. Joey Joe Joe Junior Shabadoo 01:51, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
  • It is very interesting that this newly created sockpuppet has contributed both to the Laurens Johannes Griessel-Landau case and this page in order to support the view of User:Lochdale. .... added in these two edits by User:Onefortyone, who didn't sign
    • Please assume good faith. I am no sockpuppet, and a cheackuser will clearly prove this if your paranoia takes you that far. Joey Joe Joe Junior Shabadoo 03:58, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
• Object. Contains masses of trivia, both labeled as such and (laboriously cherry-picked/documented) presented within the main text. -- Hoary 03:48, 22 October 2006 (UTC)