Wikipedia:Featured article removal candidates/World Wide Web

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

World Wide Web[edit]

Article is no longer a featured article.

This article, featured on the main page today, has several problems. Parts of this article read way too much like an essay, with clear instances of POV and/or original, subjective interpretation ("these bold visions", "beyond text", also see "Publishing web pages" comment on talk). The overall structure is poor; the order and choice of sections seems arbitrary. For example, the "Java and Javascript" section should rather be called "Dynamic content", or something similar, and cover more than these two particular technologies. The section says nothing useful about what dynamic content is and what it is supposed to be good for. The "Sociological implications" section is vague and incomplete at best. Poor writing: many one-sentence paragraphs, missing wikilinks. Sub-standard choice of images. And perhaps the worst problem: this article is blatantly incomprehensive; there is almost nothing on types of websites, search engines, organization of the web and websites, the web's role in commerce, and probably many things I didn't think about. In my opinion, this article could use a rewrite from the ground up. Fredrik | talk 18:35, 1 Nov 2004 (UTC)

  • I agree with your points. However, put them on the article talk page — this page will receive enough attention today that perhaps someone will do something about them. Regardless of the article content, I think the idea of taking down an active featured article is unprecedented. Derrick Coetzee 18:52, 1 Nov 2004 (UTC)
    • The article must be listed here for two weeks before it can be taken down. Fredrik | talk 20:02, 1 Nov 2004 (UTC)
      • Well I mistakingly moved this entry to the WWW talk page. But that article is actually not recently promoted and because processing on this page will last at least two weeks, I see no problem with its inclusion here. The issues Fredrik points out are valid and should be taken care off in some way. So I'm going to add the FARC template to the WWW talk page now. -- [[User:Solitude|Solitude\talk]] 20:09, Nov 1, 2004 (UTC)
  • Remove. While I don't think it is helpful to list articles here while they are on the main page, this article has not improved enough after being there. It still has basically all of the above problems. Please do copy those criticisms to the talk page so editors can work on them. I think it would have been much more helpful had they been there. I think the image choice is perfect though actually. - Taxman 18:33, Nov 4, 2004 (UTC)
  • Remove - much more could be said, and this does not cut the mustard (I like the lead image too, though). -- ALoan (Talk) 12:22, 5 Nov 2004 (UTC)