Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Stress (physics)/archive1

Stress (physics)[edit]

I think this article is already comprehensive, academically accurate and reader-friendly, therefore meeting the criteria for a featured article. --Sandycx (Talk) 11:07, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Edit counts:

116 Sanpaz (talk)
43 Duk (talk)
43 RDT2 (talk)

--ROGER DAVIES ^talk 12:51, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Strong oppose — There aren't the references. MOJSKA 666 - Leave a message here 11:31, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose: have you read the Featured Article criteria? 1c: "'Factually accurate' means that claims are verifiable against reliable sources and accurately represent the relevant body of published knowledge. Claims are supported with specific evidence and external citations; this involves the provision of a "References" section in which sources are set out, complemented by inline citations where appropriate." Complete lack of inline citations does not an FA make. I cannot comment on the subject matter, but just a glance tells me that it is not verifiable (only four book sources, no citations) and that it relies too much on diagrams. Best to work on it and then try for GA first. María (habla conmigo) 12:28, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment This appears to be a drive-by nom and it seems the principal contributors haven't been consulted. --ROGER DAVIES ^talk 12:51, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:07, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I would not nominate this article yet. Some fronts have not been addressed yet, i.e. citations, other topics (sections), complete existing sections, etc.Sanpaz (talk) 20:03, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]