243:
FYI, I've done a few of the tasks noted on the page: Moved some of the most newsy external links, fixed reference 4, fixed some of the "citation needed" places, and worked on the lead. I agree with all the suggestions, and I hope someone does them sooner or later, regardless of whether or not the FA
112:
the article, but just skimming I see several , sections with almost no references, unnecessary use of TeX for simple inline equations and symbols, inconsistent use of quotation marks, inconsistent use of fractions, improper formatting of SI units, and inconsistent formatting of large numbers. I also
378:
it. There are long sections without inline citations, making it difficult for an outsider to assess reliability. I'd recommend trimming the table of contents and the see also links (it's unnecessary to put links already in the text or common terms, such as meter and SI units, in the see also
113:
think that the lead is too short and incomplete (e.g., no mention of history at all). Finally, the external links section has accreted a lot of stuff that doesn't belong (if fact, I doubt that this topic needs an external links section at all). --
281:
Well, most other FAs put inline cites outside the punctuation. Also, the format is inconsistent right now, and most of the existing inline citations are outside the punctuation, so it makes sense to fix that one example.
149:
field if using templates; use en dashes in page ranges, mix of
Citation and Cite XXX templates needs to be converted to one format, ref 4 is just a bare untitled link.
213:
296:
One convention I've seen used is to put the note after punctuation if the citation applies to the whole sentence or clause, and before if not. For example:
188:
228:
Instead of "A more complete description of the passage of light through a medium is given by quantum electrodynamics.", use a see also template.
40:
93:. There are quite a few references and citations, but parts remain poorly cited, and no doubt there are egregious MOS violations too. --
30:
17:
135:
External links: Do we really need links to random news articles? That's what links to sister projects like
Wikinews are for. See
425:
439:
406:
388:
368:
348:
321:
291:
276:
253:
237:
122:
102:
78:
359:: no source is given. The original file on wiki, which was unlicensed, was labelled as PD-USGov by an anonymous IP.
158:"The constant speed of light is one of the fundamental Postulates" What's the reason for the random capitalization?
260:
89:. It has been featured for over 4 years now, and has not been formally reviewed in all that time despite having
312:
In the first case the reference covers both colors, and in the second each reference covers only one color. --
98:
272:
356:
249:
384:
364:
152:
See also needs to be pared drastically, I bet most of those links are already in the article. See
419:
402:
344:
287:
233:
181:
94:
268:
162:
153:
131:
I'm just skimming through, and listing all the technical issues I see. Working backwards...
245:
435:
380:
360:
317:
142:
118:
64:
415:
398:
340:
283:
229:
201:
136:
53:
86:
259:
Dabomb87, while I agree that "nline citations should be outside punctuation",
430:
313:
267:
placed after any punctuation such as a comma or period …" (my emphasis). --
114:
177:
173:
169:
161:
Only captions that are complete sentences should have periods, see
194:
There are one-sentence sections that could be merged with others.
39:
Further comments should be made on the article's talk page or at
338:
Suggested FA criteria concerns are referencing (1c) and MoS (2).
222:
Inline citations should be outside punctuation, not inside.
261:
Knowledge:Manual of Style#Punctuation and inline citations
145:, PDF documents need to be denoted as such through the
90:
57:
397:
MOS and citation concerns remain largely unaddressed.
225:
Use of slightly unencyclopedic language ("Note that").
204:
374:
This is beyond my expertise, but I'd be inclined to
263:
does not mandate it, but says "Inline citations are
189:
Knowledge:Manual of Style (text_formatting)#Boldface
85:This is a top importance article which gets around
207:
447:The above discussion is preserved as an archive.
108:I agree with these concerns. I haven't actually
43:). No further edits should be made to this page.
453:No further edits should be made to this page.
29:The following is an archived discussion of a
8:
203:
459:
41:Knowledge talk:Featured article review
7:
168:Overlinking throughout, examples:
24:
18:Knowledge:Featured article review
1:
389:15:48, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
79:Knowledge:WikiProject Physics
440:03:38, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
407:02:45, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
369:17:31, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
349:13:47, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
322:06:38, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
292:01:09, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
277:10:20, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
254:06:27, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
238:03:31, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
187:Wrong use of bold text, see
123:12:06, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
103:14:42, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
501:
307:Light can be red or green.
299:Light can be red or green.
219:Use {{Convert}} template.
450:Please do not modify it.
216:templates for fractions.
36:Please do not modify it.
355:There's a problem with
56:23:46, 7 December 2008
31:featured article review
244:status is kept. :-) --
209:
210:
91:changed substantially
357:Image:Usaf-laser.jpg
202:
197:Unnecessary use of
205:
87:6,000 view per day
71:Review commentary
492:
485:
482:
476:
473:
467:
464:
452:
214:
212:
211:
208:{\displaystyle }
206:
141:References: See
48:The article was
38:
500:
499:
495:
494:
493:
491:
490:
489:
488:
483:
479:
474:
470:
465:
461:
457:
448:
334:
332:FARC commentary
200:
199:
73:
68:
34:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
498:
496:
487:
486:
477:
468:
458:
456:
455:
443:
442:
409:
352:
351:
333:
330:
329:
328:
327:
326:
325:
324:
310:
309:
308:
302:
301:
300:
241:
240:
226:
223:
220:
217:
215:
195:
192:
185:
166:
159:
156:
150:
148:
139:
126:
125:
83:
82:
72:
69:
67:
65:Speed of light
62:
61:
46:
45:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
497:
481:
478:
472:
469:
463:
460:
454:
451:
445:
444:
441:
437:
433:
432:
427:
424:
421:
417:
413:
410:
408:
404:
400:
396:
393:
392:
391:
390:
386:
382:
377:
372:
371:
370:
366:
362:
358:
350:
346:
342:
339:
336:
335:
331:
323:
319:
315:
311:
306:
305:
303:
298:
297:
295:
294:
293:
289:
285:
280:
279:
278:
274:
270:
266:
262:
258:
257:
256:
255:
251:
247:
239:
235:
231:
227:
224:
221:
218:
198:
196:
193:
190:
186:
183:
179:
175:
171:
167:
164:
160:
157:
155:
151:
146:
144:
140:
138:
134:
133:
132:
130:
124:
120:
116:
111:
107:
106:
105:
104:
100:
96:
95:Testing times
92:
88:
81:
80:
75:
74:
70:
66:
63:
60:
58:
55:
51:
44:
42:
37:
32:
27:
26:
19:
480:
471:
462:
449:
446:
429:
422:
411:
394:
375:
373:
354:
353:
337:
269:Jitse Niesen
264:
242:
128:
127:
109:
84:
76:
54:User:Joelr31
49:
47:
35:
28:
414:Agree with
182:WP:OVERLINK
379:section).
163:WP:CAPTION
381:DrKiernan
361:DrKiernan
265:generally
154:WP:LAYOUT
77:Notified:
426:contribs
416:Dabomb87
399:Dabomb87
341:Marskell
284:Dabomb87
230:Dabomb87
147:format=
143:WP:CITE
50:removed
412:Remove
395:Remove
376:remove
180:. See
178:vacuum
174:second
170:mirror
129:Issues
246:Steve
137:WP:EL
16:<
436:talk
431:Cirt
420:talk
403:talk
385:talk
365:talk
345:talk
318:talk
314:Itub
288:talk
273:talk
250:talk
234:talk
119:talk
115:Itub
110:read
99:talk
428:).
304:vs
52:by
438:)
405:)
387:)
367:)
347:)
320:)
290:)
275:)
252:)
236:)
176:,
172:,
121:)
101:)
59:.
33:.
484:.
475:.
466:.
434:(
423:·
418:(
401:(
383:(
363:(
343:(
316:(
286:(
271:(
248:(
232:(
191:.
184:.
165:.
117:(
97:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.