Wikipedia:Featured article review/Attila the Hun/archive1

Attila the Hun[edit]

Review commentary[edit]

Posted to WP:WPBIO and WP:MILHIST --plange 22:25, 24 September 2006 (UTC) Also notified Classical Greece and Rome and Middle Ages. Sandy 22:54, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Lacks inline citations per 1c --plange 22:18, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Besides the general need for citations, numerous direct quotes with no cite, and some weasle words that require attention. Sandy 23:17, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Attila in Music section needs either clean up or removal. I've made a start, but it's late. Adam Cuerden ^talk 01:38, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. My knowledge of the subject is limited to what it says in Heather's Fall of the Roman Empire, but there are a few parts of the article which may be original research. First, regarding Merovech. The footnote is vague. If this is an exciting new interpretation of primary source material, whose is it ? The part on meaning of Attila's name seems similar. Lastly, who is Michael Babcock, and is his work on Attila's death taken seriously ? [Answers: a philologist and probably not.] Angus McLellan (Talk) 08:07, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Probably why there are so many weasle words. Sandy 13:31, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment As a lot of reviewers have commented, weasel words which seem like original research need to be addressed. A lot of required inline citations are missing too (1. c. violation). I think the prose may need tightening up also (1. a.) - Tony will be able to give a more comprehensive review regarding the possible 1. a. concern if he has the time. LuciferMorgan 22:40, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Needs many more inline citations.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk} 02:25, 28 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Move to FARC: diff since nom shows no change, article still uncited. Sandy 03:06, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

FARC commentary[edit]

Suggested FA criteria concerns are lack of citations (1c) and prose (1a). Marskell 08:39, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Remove Not extensively cited.UberCryxic 23:31, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Remove The citing is abyssmal, the section on Attila in Music is misplaced, and having FA status is probably only serving to damp down the possibility of fixing it up, since everyone thinks it must be fine. For that matter, it isn't actually cited at all: Those aren't cites, they're commentary.Adam Cuerden ^talk 23:39, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]