Wikipedia:Featured article review/Crime fiction

Crime fiction[edit]

Article is no longer a featured article.

this article is from "brilliant prose" days, and, despite having clear consensus to remove it from the featured list in a previous vote (see Wikipedia:Archive/Refreshing_brilliant_prose_-_People_and_culture#Culture) it hs somehow managed to stick around. it contains a "further reading" section but nothing in the way of references. request was made for references in april 2005 with no response. the lead fails to suitably summarize the body of the article. it is full of poor writing, even in the lead: "boundaries can be, and indeed are, blurred". much of the writing is over-casual, not suitable for an encylopeida. it is full of original research phrases (with bonus weasel words): "Seen from a practical point of view, one could argue that a crime novel is simply a novel that can be found in a bookshop on the shelf or shelves labelled "Crime".". thanks for that insightful statement guys. fairuse images without fair use rationale, and pd images with obsolete tags, abound. finally, stylistically its a mess with inline external links all over the place instead of wikilinks.

Remove per nom Zzzzz 00:25, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, you get a pass on this one since there has been a longstanding request to ad or clarify the references and that hasn't been done. But per the FARC guidelines, please detail the article's deficiencies on the talk page and give some time for them to be addressed. Unfortunately I must say remove, because there are no references. There's no evidence the Further reading were properly used as references. - Taxman ^Talk 13:02, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
This can't be easily fixed soon. Remove for now. - Mgm|^(talk) 10:16, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Remove. Good essay, but borders on original research. Definitely not an example of the best of WP. Davodd 10:00, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]