Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Singlish/archive1

Singlish[edit]

I think this is complete. Nothing to say. Maybe some sounds would be an improvement. ♦ Pabix ^ℹ 11:18, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Object Intro too short, TOC too long, no inline cites, way too many lists, article a bit long. Rlevse 11:34, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Object reasons above -ScotchMB 13:15, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Object per Rlevse --Wisd e n17 14:25, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. I can't seem to find a peer review, either. Was it reviewed? -- Grafikm ^(AutoGRAF) 15:01, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Object per above. Regarding the article length and the length of the Table of Contents, reccomend breaking off details (especially lists) into other articles, providing only a summary in this article, with a link to the new subtopic as the "main article" on that subtopic. Also reccomend a peer review. Armedblowfish (talk|mail|contribs) 15:10, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I was not aware of procedures on English wikipedia. Can you launch a review then? ♦ Pabix ^ℹ 15:47, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Peer reviews aren't technically required for FA status, but they are helpful. You'd get a lot of the same comments you've been getting here, but in a way more focused towards helping you improve the article than objecting to it becoming an FA right now. It's normally customary for someone involved in the article to launch the peer review (since you will be the one(s) responding to suggestions), but if the procedure confuses you, I could do it. Armedblowfish (talk|mail|contribs) 17:08, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've made the Peer Review for you. FYI, you never put a FAC tag on the article. I've also removed this from FAC for you. Rlevse 18:23, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]