Wikipedia:Articles for improvement/Nominations/Archives/2022/7

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Architect[edit]

Architect – (page view stats • edit • talk • history) - 804 daily hits

  • Article in need of expansion and more citations. SVcode(Talk) 00:38, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  1. Support High hits and needs expannsion. Varedev2 (talk) 15:03, 29 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Support could use sourcing. — PerfectSoundWhatever (t; c) 18:27, 19 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Support Important, improvement necessary ReadItAlready (talk) 22:53, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ApprovedSVcode(Talk) 22:36, 2 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]


John Oliver Memorial Sewer Plant[edit]

John Oliver Memorial Sewer Plant – (page view stats • edit • talk • history) - 1348 daily hits

  • Even though it is C-class, it still needs a bit more expanding. SVcode(Talk) 23:25, 11 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  1. Oppose. It's mostly a pop culture topic that'll have plenty of editors without our help. And it's not very enduring—the views will fade over time as the joke wears off. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 01:53, 12 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Support needs the help of the project. definitely enough hits.--BabbaQ (talk) 23:06, 17 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Oppose Views faded off, article now holds an average of 46 daily views Varedev2 (talk) 15:03, 29 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Oppose The Article turned into a Good Article.Why should we improve it? Danubeball (talk) 02:22, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Oppose – It's a good article now and it's been on this page for almost a year with only one support (apart from the nom itself). Clovermoss (talk) 20:50, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Oppose is a GA. — PerfectSoundWhatever (t; c) 18:21, 19 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

no Not approvedSVcode(Talk) 22:36, 2 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]


Hope chest[edit]

Hope chest – (page view stats • edit • talk • history) - 228 daily hits

This is an object that people have made/used for centuries, so I feel like there's a lot of room for potential improvement and that overall, it could be a lot more comprehensive than it is right now. Clovermoss (talk) 17:30, 15 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  1. Support, needs to be updated. SVcode(Talk) 23:51, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]


Commerce[edit]

Commerce – (page view stats • edit • talk • history) - 408 daily hits

A level-5 VA article that's incredibly short. A previous proposal to merge it to trade failed, so if we're stuck with it we should try to build it up. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 23:57, 24 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  1. Support, enough hits, needs more expansion. SVcode(Talk) 12:19, 26 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Support High views and is important Varedev2 (talk) 15:03, 29 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Support Passes all 4 Generally Agreed on things. Danubeball (talk) 02:20, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Neutral Important, but should this even be its own article? — PerfectSoundWhatever (t; c) 18:31, 19 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ApprovedSVcode(Talk) 22:36, 2 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Barbary States[edit]

Barbary States – (page view stats • edit • talk • history) - 425 daily hits

  • This article needs more expansion. SVcode(Talk) 14:55, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  1. Oppose. We're not actually missing most of the information here; it's just located in other articles, primarily Maghreb, which is a nice B-class. It's not even fully clear that "Barbary States" ought to be a distinct article, as opposed to just merged into Maghreb, where it's mentioned as a historical name for the region. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 03:26, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Support Indeed it needs expansion. And the project will help with that.--BabbaQ (talk) 11:02, 18 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Support Lots of potential. Rubbish computer Ping me or leave a message on my talk page 11:24, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Neutral for now, with no prejudice to revisiting after the merge proposal is sorted out. — Godsy (TALKCONT) 21:21, 28 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Neutral Waiting until merge is finished Varedev2 (talk) 15:03, 29 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Support Article needs expansion Aleena98 (talk) 03:25, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Circassian Genocide[edit]

Circassian genocide – (page view stats • edit • talk • history) - 470 daily hits

  • The article is written in a tendentious style. fragments concerning the facts of violence should be considered in a separate section of the article, and not cited as general facts. in addition, many points about violence ("Russian generals allow raping 7-year girls", "children were feeding to dogs") are confirmed by incorrect references, where these quotes are missing. The role of the Ottoman Empire is indicated one-sidedly, only the resistance to migration at a later stage is mentioned. at the same time, at the beginning of the process, the Ottoman Empire encouraged the spread of the idea of migration among the Circassian elites. Dimura 1 (talk) 05:10, 27 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
For contentious topics, it's often better to bring them up at the talk page or at WP:NPOVN than here. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 20:46, 28 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  1. Oppose, per nom. SVcode(Talk) 12:18, 26 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Oppose article can be fixed per nom Varedev2 (talk) 15:03, 29 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

State of emergency[edit]

State of emergency – (page view stats • edit • talk • history) - 804 daily hits

  • The article needs more citations and needs to be updated along with other issues. SVcode(Talk) 01:03, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  1. Support Article has room for improvement Varedev2 (talk) 15:03, 29 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Great Fire of Rome[edit]

Great Fire of Rome – (page view stats • edit • talk • history) - 446 daily hits

  • The articles needs to be expanded, preferably include more details about casualties, damage to the city and ensuing political changes.Aleena98 (talk) 13:16, 20 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  1. Support, needs expansion. SVcode(Talk) 23:51, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Partnership for Peace[edit]

Partnership for Peace – (page view stats • edit • talk • history) - 3134 daily hits

  • The article needs expansion. Wayow (talk) 12:49, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  1. Support, needs expansion. SVcode(Talk) 00:39, 23 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

General officer[edit]

General officer – (page view stats • edit • talk • history) - 769 daily hits

  • General redirects to the page and it is a Wikipedia level-5 vital article in Society. Though, a lot of the article is unsourced. Sahaib (talk) 20:13, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  1. Support, per nom.SVcode(Talk) 01:16, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Support per nom. Danubeball (talk) 02:57, 19 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Country[edit]

Country – (page view stats • edit • talk • history) - 39,896 daily hits

  • The only one I would see an issue with is the Controversies but it’s a 2 vital article with almost 40,000 people finding this. And the fact that it’s a start article with plenty of unverified sentences.I’d say it deserves to be here. Danubeball (talk) 17:49, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Scarf[edit]

Scarf – (page view stats • edit • talk • history) - 122 daily hits

  • Vital article with broad interest. There's a refimprove tag and I think that this article has a lot of potential for expansion. Clovermoss (talk) 20:57, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  1. Support Low Hits,But it fits every other category with flying colors. Danubeball (talk) 02:56, 19 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Support, per Danubebal. SVcode(Talk) 19:40, 4 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yard (land)[edit]

Yard (land) – (page view stats • edit • talk • history) - 74 daily hits

  • Even though it has low hits, this level-5 vital article needs expansion and citation improvement. SVcode(Talk) 23:58, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  1. Support – Vital article that could be improved. Hits aren't everything and this has broad interest. Clovermoss (talk) 20:51, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Family cookbooks[edit]

Family cookbooks – (page view stats • edit • talk • history) - 2 daily hits

  1. Oppose, Article doesn't have enough hits and it is not a vital article. SVcode(Talk) 00:01, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Oppose Low importance and vital-ness. — PerfectSoundWhatever (t; c) 18:22, 19 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Kiddie ride[edit]

Kiddie ride – (page view stats • edit • talk • history) - 45 daily hits

  • The article has had the needs additional citations for verification tag since 2009 and the possibly contains original research tag since 2010. I removed most of the unsourced paragraphs, but the article still needs improvement. Sahaib3005 (talk) 17:38, 6 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  1. Neutral. A meaningful general topic, but the view count is low and the sourcing is about what I'd expect for a start-class page. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 18:54, 6 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Oppose, it has less views and is not a vital article and it has issues that are start-class. SVcode(Talk) 00:27, 8 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Oppose Meaningful topic, but low hits and start-class issues Varedev2 (talk) 15:03, 29 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wings of Fire (novel series)[edit]

Wings of Fire (novel series) – (page view stats • edit • talk • history) - 801 daily hits

  • Was nominated for deletion in January 2021. All votes agreed the subject was notable and met GNG, but the article was in a terrible state and needed improvement. A year later, the only thing that was improved was the plot summaries being removed. RanDom 404 (talk) 18:56, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  1. Support, has lots of hits and needs to be improved. SVcode(Talk) 15:29, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Support Per SVcode. Danubeball (talk) 01:36, 22 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Support Meets all criteria. ReadItAlready (talk) 22:55, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Approved SVcode(Talk) 22:36, 2 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]


Identity (social science)[edit]

Identity (social science) – (page view stats • edit • talk • history) - 567 daily hits

A level-4 VA with numerous obvious issues. Representative of our very poor coverage of social science topics. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 19:41, 15 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  1. Support, per above. SVcode(Talk) 23:51, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Support — PerfectSoundWhatever (t; c) 18:32, 19 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Support Danubeball (talk) 17:51, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Approved SVcode(Talk) 22:19, 8 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Revival of the woolly mammoth[edit]

Revival of the woolly mammoth – (page view stats • edit • talk • history) - 128 daily hits

  • Article is about an obviously notable subject. Could be expanded WAY more. Is of high importance to a WikiProject (see the talk page). Cranloa12n / talk / contribs / 01:49, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  1. Oppose, notable but not enough hits and isn't an vital article. SVcode(Talk) 00:13, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Oppose Appears well-sourced, a decent length, not high importance. — PerfectSoundWhatever (t; c) 18:38, 19 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Oppose – Decent length and this also seems like the kind of thing that would likely benefit from the expertise of an actual geneticist (not the majority of people involved with TAFI?). I do agree that it's interesting, though. Clovermoss (talk) 23:19, 11 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

no Not approvedSVcode(Talk) 23:32, 17 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_improvement/Nominations/Archives/2022/7&oldid=1098926213"