Wikipedia:Featured article review/History of the Peerage/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 removed 14:51, 7 January 2008.

History of the Peerage[edit]

Review commentary[edit]

Notified User:DrKiernan, User:Emsworth and Wikipedia:WikiProject Peerage

This is an Emsworth classic, and will pretty much rap up our reviewing of the Peerage. Same issue as the last review, no in-line citations, and should probably needs a quick copyedit check and image rationale check as it is an older article. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 21:20, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A couple of notes, Judge. Notify User:DrKiernan. But do not notify Emsworth; it's pointless, and I was hoping people would stop doing it. Also, when FAR is up around 35 reviews the regular people might hold back a little before new noms. Marskell (talk) 08:34, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I only added it after the Privledge of Peerage article was kept, but I understand what your saying. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 15:05, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In this case, the origins of the Peerage could use some work, out of the Complete Peerage; we know more than this, and probably more than the 1911 Britannica. Remind me. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 19:15, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Needs a copy-edit (1a); lead is inadequate (2a). Tony (talk) 09:54, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

FARC commentary[edit]

Suggested FA criteria concerns are referencing (1c), prose (1a), images (3), and LEAD (2a). Marskell (talk) 17:24, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The three images are all public domain. DrKiernan (talk) 09:02, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Remove per 1c. LuciferMorgan (talk) 23:52, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Remove per nom. --Peter Andersen (talk) 20:08, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing doing here, so removing. Marskell (talk) 14:50, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article review. No further edits should be made to this page.