Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Malaysia/archive1

The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was not promoted 16:28, 18 November 2007.

---

Malaysia

I'm nominating this article for featured article because this article has undergone a complete overhaul last month to ensure it is comprehensive, flowing, and extremely well referenced, and I believe it fully meets the FA criteria. White2020 06:57, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

WP:FAC instructions, "Users are asked not to add a second nomination here until the first has gained support and concerns have been substantially addressed." Do you want to withdraw one of your nominations? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 07:02, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I'm withdrawing the nomination for Universiti Sains Malaysia. White2020 07:25, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

• Oppose. Weak citation. Sourcing has not improved ever since I last cleaned them up back in December 2006. Do compare the last time I worked on the reference section [1] with the current edition [2]. There was no "complete overhaul" last month at all. The article requires considerable improvement before it could be promoted to FA level. __earth ^(Talk) 08:54, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

• Oppose. I only read the lead section and it is not summarizing at all the whole article. The lead section is poorly written. For a general reader who wants to learn about Malaysia, the lead section is very confusing with already specific terminologies about the territory and politics, some of which are not related with the country in general. Why would you introduce road connections between Malaysia and neighboring countries in the lead section? Per WP:LEAD, it has many problems: it is not capable of standing alone as a concise overview of the article and there are many missing important point, notably the overall history and culture. Besides that, there are couple of assertions in the lead section which have problems:
  1. Although politically dominated by the Malays, modern Malaysian society is heterogeneous, with substantial Chinese and Indian minorities. → the source links to CIA world fact that shows Indian in Malaysia is only 7.1%, while indigenous 11%. Why isn't there indigenous minority as also a substantial component? The assertion "politically dominated by the Malays" also needs a citation there.
  2. I don't understand what "communal nature" is. There is no wikilink and the source cannot be verified directly Also the last word of ...restrict membership to those of one ethnic group (what ethnic groups??)

I stop reading at the lead section. I will continue to the rest of the article when this problem has been solved. — Indon (reply) — 09:31, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

• Comment: I've addressed your concern and redone the lead section. Despite that, I doubt the page merits an FA. It should go through a review process first. __earth ^(Talk) 15:01, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Reply: Okay, I see that, but you put also citation request tags there. Agree with you, the article should go to the peer review first. — Indon (reply) — 14:12, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

• Oppose - very weak citation, esp. in the section of economy. I doubt that if this article meets GA criteria. Coloane 04:01, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.