Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Kibbutz/archive2
Renomination. The last nomination got very few votes, but the object votes had issues with the article's organization, especially the lack of info on the background of the kibbutz movement. The article has now (laboriously) been reorganized and further expanded.Dinopup 19:19, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Support AndyL 20:11, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Support. I'd like to congratulate User:Dinopup for his excellent work since the last FAC nomination of this article, which I opposed. He has truly done an outstanding job. That being said, it would be nice if someone with a good mastery of English could go over the article and copy edit it so it is 100% ready for featured status. As it is, the prose is perfectly comprehensible, but there are still some unusual repetitions and wordings here and there. I could do this myself, but I am certain the result wouldn't be as good as if one of our native English-speaking editor does it. Phils 20:43, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Support. I did a quick pass on the punctuation and spelling. However, there's still some repetition, such as the decline of the children's societies. --Wahoofive 23:35, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Support. Well done User:Dinopup. - RoyBoy 800 02:52, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Support. Excellent. Gdr 14:59, 2005 Mar 27 (UTC)
- Support. Hydriotaphia 20:22, Mar 27, 2005 (UTC)
- Oppose Totally inadequate lead section and nearly twice the recommended page size. Article size is very important given that the average attention span of people is 20 minutes and it takes the average person about that amount of time to read 30 to 35 KB of prose. So a person who needs a good primer on this topic would not likely finish reading this article. Nothing wrong with having a great deal of coverage on a topic, but having so much in one article is not optimal. See Wikipedia:Summary style on how to fix this (involves summarizing some sections and moving the more detailed text to daughter articles). There also appear to be a complete lack of subsectioning. --mav 20:43, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- I agree the article could use splitting. As I see it, a great deal of the information in sections 1, 2, 4 and 5 could be put in an article about the history of Kibbutzim Phils 23:09, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Comment. In dire need of a thorough spellcheck pass--I only got halfway thru and found almost a half-dozen obvious misspellings and doublets (eg "holidy", "called called"). At .17 I presently am in no condition to do it myself, but it's not that hard to throw the text into a word processor and let its spelling checker do half the work. Niteowlneils 23:07, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)Spellchecker pass done. Niteowlneils 06:56, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- I am a embarrassed by the language mistakes. I wish I could say "I'm not a native English speaker" (as Phils assumed) but alas English is my first language. Sometimes though one doesn't notice one's own mistakes, so perhaps that was my problem. Hydriotaphia (thank you) has made many corrections, I just made a couple corrections that Niteowl pointed out. As for the length, I know that there are other FAs that are quite long. John Vanbrugh and the Cantos are two recent FAs that are as massive and thes kibbutz article. For what it's worth, most browsers can handle a 58 k article without a problem. Dinopup 00:06, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- In the 'Kibbutzim during the British Mandate' section, Russian Revolution seems to need to be dabbed, but I'm not sure which one is being referred to. Niteowlneils 07:44, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Niteowl, I indicated that the Revolution of 1917 was the one being referred to.Dinopup 20:10, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- In the 'Kibbutzim during the British Mandate' section, Russian Revolution seems to need to be dabbed, but I'm not sure which one is being referred to. Niteowlneils 07:44, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- I am a embarrassed by the language mistakes. I wish I could say "I'm not a native English speaker" (as Phils assumed) but alas English is my first language. Sometimes though one doesn't notice one's own mistakes, so perhaps that was my problem. Hydriotaphia (thank you) has made many corrections, I just made a couple corrections that Niteowl pointed out. As for the length, I know that there are other FAs that are quite long. John Vanbrugh and the Cantos are two recent FAs that are as massive and thes kibbutz article. For what it's worth, most browsers can handle a 58 k article without a problem. Dinopup 00:06, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Oppose. The article looks promising, but 58 k just isn't decent.
I think the introduction could be longer. Perhaps elaborating a bit on the socialistic experiment.Peter Isotalo 00:43, Mar 28, 2005 (UTC)- Peter and Maveric, per your comments I added an historical overview paragraph to the introduction. dinopup
- Support - As a kibbutz member, I like the article, it is important to bring it to much people as possible, shorter even better. Keep up the good work, you can always expend it#################
- Support. This article should be long. There must be more than two good external links, though. Samaritan 21:12, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Support. Length seems appropriate to me. Lead section and references could still be improved; a more specific introductory overview of what a kibbutz is -- what makes kibbutzim like and unlike other forms of communal living -- would be especially nice. -- Rbellin|Talk 02:20, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- I added two new external links, I added a sentence to strengthen the introduction ("indeed, kibbutzim played an essential role in the creation of Israel.") and I made clarifications per Niteowl's suggestions. Thank you everyone who has offered advice! I'm sorry my prose hasn't always been so neat. I will make more changes if advised. (though I'm relucant to make the article shorter, I don't know what I'd cut)Dinopup 04:31, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)