Wikipedia:Featured article review/Louis Armstrong/archive1

Louis Armstrong

Review commentary

Messages left at Phil Sandifer, Biography, and Jazz. Sandy 13:59, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Only one inline citation at the very end, which is a news article about a stadium named after him. Even the note about his birthdate doesn't supply a reference, which it definitely needs. Otherwise seems like a good article. Mlm42 09:20, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Most definitely needs inline citations (1. c.), especially the section concerning his legacy. I think he left a substantial legacy, but the article right now doesn't use factual evidence to prove this, nor calls on the expertise of music historians. All this needs addressing. LuciferMorgan 17:50, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Agre with Lucifer, further, there is lots of short paras in need of merging (bad style) and it is strange to see a 'Filmography' list, but no 'Discography' or 'Songs of...' - it appears not be comprehensive.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk} 02:22, 28 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Move to FARC. During the review period, about a dozen minor edits: here's the diff. Issues have not been addressed. Sandy 17:52, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

FARC commentary

Suggested FA criteria concerns are lack of citations (1c) and comprehensiveness (1b). Marskell 10:26, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Remove Lack of inline citations (1. c. violation), and incomprehensive (1. b.) as it doesn't deal with Armstrong's legacy. LuciferMorgan 16:27, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Remove. Inadequate citations. I also think that the lead is short.--Yannismarou 18:13, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Remove Per above. Appears work is not being done to improve. Jay32183 17:58, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]