Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Slasher film/archive1
The article is informative, covers all the major milestones of the genre, with dates, names, has a neutral stance on the subject, references serious academic discussion on the topic and popular criticism. It has working links and does not cover the same ground as other articles.
- Object. No where near comprehensive enough. Evil Monkey∴Hello 00:20, Jun 2, 2005 (UTC)
- Object As Evil Monkey says, this is barely an outline. Although it mentions academic works it has no references. It also screams for an image or two. Dsmdgold 02:43, Jun 2, 2005 (UTC)
- Object Virtually none of the basic requirements are met; please read the requirements before nominating articles to FAC. Phils 06:22, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Object. This meets none of the FA criteria. On a side note to this article, we really need to rethink letting anons nominate articles for featured status - they end up adding poor candidates like this which doesn't help the process. Harro5 06:56, Jun 2, 2005 (UTC)
- Object This should not be here! Giano | talk 12:51, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Object, not comprehensive. Neutralitytalk 19:49, Jun 4, 2005 (UTC)