Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Denis Diderot/archive1

Denis Diderot[edit]

This man is as close as they come to being the ultimate role-model for encyclopedia editors, and the article is excellent. - Eric 11:57, 24 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose, for the following reasons:

No references given.
The structure is a bit puzzling to me: the section "Other works" contains information about the end of his life and his death. The article may benefit from being splitted in one section for his life, and one separate section about his works
There seems to be one inconcistency about what happenend with his library. One paragraph says he saw no other alternative than to sell his library (and he sells it to Catherine II), and in the next paragraph, His heirs sold his vast library to Catherine II.Schutz 12:28, 24 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Object. Referencing consists of a single embedded HTML link and a statement that the "article incorporates text from the Encyclopædia Britannica Eleventh Edition". This level of referencing is inadequate for a featured article. --Allen3 ^talk 12:30, 24 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Object as per Allen3 and Schutz. I don't want to find slabs of text lifted from another encyclopedia, especially without quote marks and attribution. A WP FA should be better than that source in a number of ways. Tony 03:38, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Object: it seems to rely heavily on the 1911 Britannica and is thus out of date. There has been a lot of new research on Diderot since then. I believe some of the dates in the article are inaccurate. --Folantin 08:03, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Object. As per Allen3, Schutz, Tony and Folantin. Some amounts of contributors and sources are needed not to rely on the encyclopedia of 95 years ago. __Okc 09:27, 31 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]