Wikipedia:Featured article review/Rhodes blood libel/archive1
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- The following is an archived discussion of a featured article review. Please do not modify it. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page or at Wikipedia talk:Featured article review. No further edits should be made to this page.
The article was delisted by Nikkimaria via FACBot (talk) 1:25, 24 April 2021 (UTC) [1].
- Notified: Beit Or, WikiProject Jewish history, WikiProject Greece, WikiProject Ottoman Empire, WikiProject Turkey, WikiProject History, WikiProject Religion, diff for talk page notification
Review section
[edit]I am nominating this featured article for review because, as stated on the talk page, the article mostly cites just one source, while there are several other scholarly sources that cover the incident. Thus, it cannot be considered well-researched or comprehensive according to the FA criteria. (t · c) buidhe 12:07, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Comments from HumanxAnthro
- I will say, in looking on the bright side, that the prose does establish all necessary concepts in a way the reader could understand and in proper order, although there are oddly-formatted sentences, and those that could be formatted better, here and there. "After an epidemic of plague in 1498–1500," "expelled those of the remaining Jews who would not be baptized." "deeply ingrained in the consciousness of some local Christian communities by the early 20th century while the blood libel likely came there in the early 19th century ." It definitely shows the writers of the article did keep in mind how a new reader would understand it, and with more sources represented and some more prose copyedits, this has got a chance of being FA. Plus, I think it's essential to get it to that quality given how under-represented the history of marginalization and oppression of Jews are in history classes. It didn't start with Nazi Germany, and it would be great for articles like this to become high-quality so more readers know that. 👨x🐱 (talk) 14:32, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Move to FARC, no engagement, heavy reliance on one source, others neglected. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:09, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Move to FARC No major edits since notice was placed on talk page in Feb. Z1720 (talk) 23:05, 9 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
FARC section
[edit]- Sourcing. Nikkimaria (talk) 01:38, 10 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Delist per above. (t · c) buidhe 02:41, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Delist - Overreliance on Frankel and not using other available sources means that this fails WP:FACR #1c. Hog Farm Talk 15:38, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Delist, no engagement since my last comment, issues not addressed. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:16, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Closing note: This removal candidate has been delisted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please leave the {{featured article review}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Nikkimaria (talk) 01:25, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.