Wikipedia:Featured article review/Maximus the Confessor/archive1
- 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) 2:43, 11 June 2022 (UTC) [1].
Maximus the Confessor[edit]
- Notified: Pastordavid, WT:BIO, WT:GREECE, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Greece/Byzantine world task force, WT:XNB, WT:SAINTS, WT:CATHOLIC, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Eastern Orthodoxy, WT:ANGLICAN, WT:LUTHER, WT:PHIL, WT:RELIGION, talk-page notice 2022-03-22
Review section[edit]
I am nominating this featured article for review because of sourcing/comprehensiveness concerns and other issues. As noted on the talk page, some content lacks citations altogether, and I'm also concerned by the reliance on outdated sources like Philip Schaff and the Catholic Encyclopedia. More significantly, there are a number of books in the further reading section and elsewhere that aren't cited at all: Thunberg 1995, Louth 1996, Nichols 1994, and many, many more. That's a major red flag, and the rather brief article has other serious comprehensiveness issues: it provides only minimal scholarly commentary on Maximus's theology, the debates over biographical facts (stemming from contradictions between the two main sources) are touched on only briefly, and the legacy and reception sections are incomplete. More minor issues include citation formatting, MOS:SANDWICH, and content that appears only in the lead. This is an important article, but I fear it would require a very significant amount of work to bring it back up to standard. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 06:23, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- I noticed the phrase "Imperial Capital". It is capitalized once, but not the other time. Most readers probably won't know which city it is, so sentences should be worded to indicate that. Also, saying he wrote the "earliest complete biography of Mary, the mother of Jesus" sounds not quite right. Just ending the sentence with "the Virgin Mary" or should be enough. But with, "Mary, the mother of Jesus" the question turns to, Why not "Mary, the Mother of God"? Is the author a heretic? He wasn't a heretic, so the the article should reflect that.--Epiphyllumlover (talk) 03:09, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Move to FARC lack of engagement/edits to address concerns (t · c) buidhe 13:47, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Move to FARC – no progress, unfortunately. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 00:05, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Move to FARC no significant edits since it has been sent to FAR. Concerns remain. Z1720 (talk) 00:58, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Move to FARC issues remain unaddressed. Hog Farm Talk 01:31, 28 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
FARC section[edit]
- Issues raised in the review section include sourcing and comprehensiveness. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:34, 28 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Delist, issues not addressed. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:15, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Delist, issues not addressed. Hog Farm Talk 18:13, 5 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Delist; no significant improvements. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 16:57, 8 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Delist, no progress on identified issues. Z1720 (talk) 03:33, 10 June 2022 (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) 02:43, 11 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.