The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was not promoted 17:10, 24 September 2007.

High quality little-known historical material which corrects widely accepted myths. CEKC 02:12, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. Severe lack of references and near-complete lack of inline citations. --Lenin and McCarthy | (Complain here) 02:38, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Speedy oppose Few references, prose that's far from brilliant, and not comprehensive. And to the nominator, please read WP:WIAFA. Thanks. -- Kicking222 02:58, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose. Too short, has citations needed, etc. --RandomOrca2 02:57, 18 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy oppose but would love to see in better form later on.Sumoeagle179 01:20, 22 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose, with regret - far too short. HeartofaDog (talk • contribs) 16:53, 22 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose. Far, far from FA standard, this wouldn't even get a GA pass. WP:ILIKEIT is not enough, I am afraid :> -- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  20:22, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.