Wikipedia:Featured article review/Sharon Tate/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 by Dana boomer 14:53, 24 August 2011 [1].

---

Sharon Tate

Review commentary

Notified: User:Rossrs (FA nominator) and all of its wiki projects

I am nominating this featured article for review because I believer that it currently does not meet the 2011 FA criteria. The article was first promoted in 2005 so it's not shocking that this is pretty how still how it looked back then since the criteria was much lower at that time. However, as the time goes by and FAs need to be in better condition, this article should be updated. Another editor raised concerns about this article in November 2010, but from what I can see not much was done to better improve it. This biggest problem is that a lot of it is largely unsourced (like the early life and career sections). Other problems are the sourcing (ref 17 is a fansite and refs 19, 24 and 25 seem questionable). Another problem is the use of three non-free images which I do not think help the reader better understand the article.

I have notified the user who helped promote it to FA status in 2005, but it does not seem like he is active anymore (his last edit was made in May). Looking at the article's edit history, it does not seem like there is any editor heavily involved with it to notify of its FAR. This is my first FAR so if I made a mistake please inform me of it for future reference. Thanks.Crystal Clear x3 07:52, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Please notify the wikiprojects listed on the talk page. Brad (talk) 01:39, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

I have now done so. Crystal Clear x3 03:31, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

• Unsourced paragraphs all over the place. Something like "They became engaged, but the relationship was volatile and they frequently quarreled." should definitely be sourced.
• The film career section is huge; can it be broken down?
• Legacy — Doris Tate Crime Victims Bureau shouldn't be bold.
• Two one-sentence paragraphs in Legacy.
• Filmography is unsourced.
• The print sources with Geocities links should have those removed.
• What makes aboundinglove.org a reliable source?
• Several primary sources in the Legacy section.
• Book sources are given in the footnotes, but not used in the article itself.

Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 05:20, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

FARC commentary

Concerns raised in the FAR section revolve mostly around sourcing. Nikkimaria (talk) 16:02, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

• Delist Does not appear that any work has been done on the article. Since FAR nomination only 8 edits have been made. One of them was mine and at least 4 others dealt with vandalism. Brad (talk) 21:26, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
• Delist - Per Brad. GamerPro64 20:00, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

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