Wikipedia:Featured article review/Economy of the Iroquois/archive1

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

The article was delisted by Nikkimaria via FACBot (talk) 3:13, 14 June 2015 (UTC) [1].

Economy of the Iroquois[edit]

Notified: Bkwillwm, WP New York, WP Economics, WP Business, WP Indigenous peoples of NA

URFA nom

Review section[edit]

This is a 2006 promotion that has not been maintained to standard; it has outdated text and uncited text, as noted on talk since 2013, and again in April 2015. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:43, 8 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delist: It wouldn't pass FAC today. That said, I think that the outdated section is not horribly egregious and perhaps the article could simply be downgraded to a GA, as it appears to meet that criteria with only a couple minor tweaks (maybe once a couple sentences are chopped.) However, I'm afraid I lack adequate motivation to work on this article, so it will have to sink or swim without my efforts to salvage it. Montanabw ^(talk) 18:10, 8 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

<standard FAR note> Montanabw, at FAR, we don't declare Keep or Delist on articles under review; that happens if they are not improved, and move to the FARC phase (at which time, you would have to return to declare). FAR allows time for improvement before decisions are made. Also, GA is a separate process; if articles are delisted at FAR, they are marked as unassessed. FAR cannot assign GA status; articles delisted at FAR have to undergo a separate GA, but I have never seen a case where a delisted FA also meets GA. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:28, 8 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

OK, that's fair enough. I haven't been involved much with FAR. I hope someone else at WP:IPMA has time to work on it because it is an interesting article. But that said, I suspect that even if it got cleaned up, it isn't quite up to FA quality anyway, looking at sources, comprehensiveness and structure. It probably could go GA without too much work, though. Montanabw ^(talk) 19:48, 8 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Move to FARC, no progress. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:27, 20 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

FARC section[edit]

Issues raised in the review section include datedness and referencing. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:28, 23 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delist. Tagged for reliability, updating and needing page numbers. DrKiernan (talk) 09:29, 7 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delist - no progress. --Laser brain (talk) 11:51, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Closing note: This removal candidate has been delisted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please leave the {{featured article review}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Nikkimaria (talk) 13:13, 14 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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