Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Nobel Prize/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 by SandyGeorgia 20:51, 27 February 2010 [1].

Nobel Prize

Nominator(s): Esuzu (talk • contribs) 13:22, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating this for featured article simply because I think it is good enough to go through a FA nomination. It recently passed a GAN and the reviewer encouraged me to nominate this article here. The article is well written and very neutral for this subject. --Esuzu (talk • contribs) 13:22, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. One dab link, to Makoto Kobayashi. No dead external links. Some small errors in alt text ("an city", etcetera); please look over it and correct. Ucucha 13:56, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed AIRcorn (talk) 01:59, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Alt text good now (I made some further edits). Ucucha 21:36, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. I'm not certain this is yet quite ready. On a quick read through I came across this: "According to the statutes, the Foundation should consist of a board of five men ...". I don't see where the statutes exclude women, but what they do say is that the members must be "Swedish or Norwegian citizens", which seems like a strange omission from this article. --Malleus Fatuorum 13:57, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I remember reading "men" somewhere but I can't find any source for it. It is probably just my memory that's faltering. Changed it into Swedish or Norweigan citizens instead. --Esuzu (talk • contribs) 13:09, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose per criterion three:
- ~~File:Logo of the Nobel prize.jpg - why is a non-free image being used when a free equivalent is being used in the same article (NFCC#1)?~~
  - Personally I feel the non-free image looks much better as it doesn't have a border. But if the other image is free perhaps it could be edited so the border disappears? --Esuzu (talk • contribs) 13:13, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    - File:NobelPrize.jpg claims that the medal design is PD in the United States because it was created before 1923. If that is true, I believe this image would also be PD; if that is not true, that image has to go (or to be claimed as fair use). Ucucha 13:27, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
      - Here's the difference between the two: when you copy (e.g. photograph) another work, there are potentially two copyrights: the work itself and the photo thereof. When the work is 2D (like a painting), the photograph isn't eligible for copyright protection (per Bridgeman v. Corel). When the work is 3D, like this medal, the photograph does get a copyright. So yes, the medal itself is PD, but, unlike File:NobelPrize.JPG which has a free license from the photographer, File:Logo of the Nobel prize.jpg has no such license. We can't claim fair use because it unambiguously fails NFCC#1. That one subjectively looks better is irrelevant. (You can, of course, alter the free one how ever you wish; removing background/border/etc. is just fine, such as was done for File:Nobel Prize.png.) Эlcobbola _talk 18:29, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
        Right, if that is the case (and I understood it correctly, I am still a beginner or licensing etc) I am just changing the picture to: File:Nobel Prize.png instead. --Esuzu (talk • contribs) 13:50, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- File:AlfredNobel adjusted.jpg - needs a verifiable source (WP:IUP). A hitherto deleted en.wiki page is not acceptable.
  - I linked it to the correct main page now[2]. That license there also seems to be linking to an hitherto en.wiki page. Any recomendations on what to do?--Esuzu (talk • contribs) 13:57, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    - I'll see whether I can find a source. Эlcobbola _talk 15:28, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- File:Alfred Nobels will-November 25th, 1895.jpg - derivative work; Nobel is the author, not Prolineserver. Image summary and license need to be corrected accordingly.
- File:Ada Yonath Weizmann Institute of Science.jpg - image does not appear at the source. How can the license be verified. Copy and pasted "permission" does not state a license, only that it's "ok to use". Is commercial usage allowed? Are derivatives allowed? This permission would need an OTRS ticket.
  - Replaced the image with one of Barack Obama since that also seems relevant to have in that section. Will look more on the license for the the other picture when I have more time. --Esuzu (talk • contribs) 14:19, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- File:NobelPrize.JPG - needs an additional license for the medal itself (there are two works here: the medal and the photo thereof).
- ~~File:Dyplom Sklodowska-Curie.jpg - needs a verifiable source (WP:IUP).~~
  - Changed to picture with File:Nobel Prize Diploma Fritz Haber 1918.JPG --Esuzu (talk • contribs) 14:03, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- File:Gandhi 1929.jpg - the PD-India copyright duration is determined using publication date. Source description contains only creation date. How can we establish when this image was published? Эlcobbola _talk 16:28, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Is there any reason why Boris Pasternak's name is wikilinked on every occurence within section on constraints and refusals? Is it simply an error or some kind of policy? MasterOfHisOwnDomain (talk) 22:05, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It was an error. Fixed now. AIRcorn (talk) 03:35, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. The first thing that strikes me as weird are the references. Practically every reference is at the least terribly formatted or (more seriously) does not appear to be a reliable media source. Examples (currently no. 119 and following ones) According to WP:V "Articles should be based on reliable, third-party, published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy." None of the following references appears to do that

http://www.workersforjesus.com/teresa.htm -- reliable?
http://nobelpeaceprize.org/en_GB/about_peaceprize/dress-code/ not third party (imagine an article about, say, soccer club Real Madrid. That article should not cite its own homepage.
[3] University home page, not suited either
google.books should cite the book, not (only) the link
[4] idem
[5] you get it

The punchline is: an article like this should cite only books by established scholars and/or news articles from respected media outlets. Jakob.scholbach (talk) 22:24, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Also in the text, the referencing is not well-done. E.g. four(!) references are given for Skłodowska-Curie getting 2 N.prizes. The "Nominations" section lists reference no. 81 (Britannica) six times in a row, but that reference fails to back up what it is cited for ("All nomination records for a prize are sealed for 50 years from the awarding of that prize."). With all due respect I suggest that somebody experienced with referencing should thoroughly brush over the article. This is nowhere near what is needed for FAC. (To get inspiration, Film noir is a shining example of good referencing techniques). Jakob.scholbach (talk) 22:32, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.