Wikipedia:Featured article review/Chuck Palahniuk/archive1
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Chuck Palahniuk
[edit] Review commentary
-
- Messages left at User:LGagnon and Bio
This article is very good overall, however, two sections Writing style and Fandom completely lack references and are possibly OR. I hope this FAR process will facilitate the correction of these problems, I'd be very reticent for us to FARC it. Mikker (...) 00:10, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
- The writing style section is based on a series of essays Palahniuk wrote that are supposed to go into his non-fiction writing book. These were on his website, but are not accessible to non-subscribers anymore. The fandom info can also be found on his website, as well as some interviews. -- LGagnon 01:45, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
- Then reinsert them with the note that there's a subscription required.--Rmky87 23:01, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
- Heck, he's an author, so let's do him the courtesy of writing the article in excellent prose. Here are examples of problems. Don't just fix these points, though.
- "and grew up living in a mobile home"—Spot the redundant word.
- "His parents later separated and divorced, often leaving him and his three siblings to live with their grandparents ..."—"Often" is odd there.
- "In his twenties, Palahniuk attended the University of Oregon's School of Journalism, graduating in 1986." No, "and graduated in".
- "While attending college, he worked as an intern for National Public Radio's KLCC in Eugene, Oregon. He moved to Portland soon afterwards. After writing for the local newspaper for a short while, he began working for ...". OK, two of the three sentences start with a time-phrase. Why not be consistent? "For a short while" does not belong in an encyclopedic register (vague).
- "had a short stint"—No.
- A few idle "also" need to be weeded out.
Not good enough. Tony 09:46, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
I'm surprised this is still an FA. No FA should have an {{unreferenced}} template anywhere in it, no matter how long ago it was promoted. Plus, as noted above, two sections are deficient and I would also add that the intro is too cursory. Either remove or rewrite to current standards. Daniel Case 20:47, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] FARC commentary
- Suggested FA criteria concerns are referencing and prose. Joelito (talk) 20:47, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
- Remove referencing concerns not addressed including the OR tag. Jay32183 20:08, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
- Remove—This is all that has been done since my last comment on 23 Oct. Tony 12:25, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
- Remove Insufficient inline cites (1. c. violatiob). LuciferMorgan 19:00, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
