Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Photoresistor/archive1

Photoresistor[edit]

This article is a good article. It does not seem too technical, or too sparsely-written. Should be on the Main Page soon. --Sunfazer | Talk 12:04, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No references... I'd suggest peer review first. It is as it always was ^{T | @ | C} 12:08, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
FAC seems a bit premature, sorry. No references, article lacks the depth needed for an FA, also seems to lack enough context for non-science people to follow it. This would probably be a good article for the Wikipedia:Science collaboration of the week. --W.marsh 12:31, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Where's the rest of it? Tony 15:15, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Just to be official. No refs and far too short, as everyone has said. Staxringold 19:32, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]