Object. This FAC is missing an explanation by its nominator for why it should be featured - but oh well... The article is missing references and has no external links section as well. The 'Chicken diseases' section should be written in detail as prose instead of a list which also links to some non-existing articles. The last three sections are also basic lists. Refer to peer review for more specific suggestions/comments. — Wackymacs 20:41, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Object. As one of the few editors, I imagine, who have this article on their watchlist, I've fought a losing battle over two years to prevent this article getting bogged down with lots of weird stuff. Just now, I've returned from months away, and I see there's an entire section of the article devoted to how to hatch chickens in Sumatra. There's a featurable article on chickens on the ideal plane somewhere, but it hasn't touched down at Wikipedia yet. Jwrosenzweig 23:34, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
A quick perusal of the history shows lots of IP edits reverted as vandalism. Given how funny chickens are, and how many jokes they are featured in, it really isn't very surprising. The Catfish 00:12, 21 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Object. There are no references, and the writing is of poor quality. —Hollow Wilerding . . . (talk) 03:03, 21 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Object. Again, no statement of references at all. Certain of the sections, especially Courting, could use some more thoroughness. 13 red links in the list of chicken diseases. AndyZ 01:19, 22 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Object and snow from IP editor - This article is locked, protected. Since when are featured articles protected? And to add insult to injury, the article dosn't even say why it's protected. And to add ambiguity to the foregoing, was the oldest chicken 16 years or 16 months old? Thank you! 76.240.228.226 (talk) 14:26, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
