Talk:Maritime history of Florida

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Maritime history of Florida is a former featured article candidate. Please view the links under Article milestones below to see why the nomination failed. For older candidates, please check the archive.
Article milestones Date Process Result January 15, 2006 Peer review Reviewed February 1, 2006 Featured article candidate Not promoted August 9, 2006 Good article reassessment Delisted Current Status: Former featured article candidate

	Florida Portal This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Florida; If you would like to join us, please visit the project page; if you have any questions, please consult the FAQ.
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)
Mid	This article has been rated as a Mid priority article
Additional information: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked

This article is a previous Unofficial Florida Article Improvement Drive. Click here to see how it improved!

[edit] Date style

Anyone know whether there's a guideline for using the 1400s vs. the 15th century?

It would seem better to use the century links, unless we're referring to a specific year. --Tetraminoe 18:32, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Good Article assessment

Very good article. A couple things may help it:

1. Infobox-style lists. This is one of the only times I will ever advocate lists, and it could be used to provide a brief year/history rundown for each century.
2. Inline references, but I know how much of a pain those are, so I understand why that alone would be a project.

Good job! —Rob (talk) 18:12, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Delisted GA

This article did not go through the current GA nomination process. Looking at the article as is, it fails on criteria 2b of the GA quality standards. Although references are provided, the citation of sources is essential for verifiability. Most Good Articles use inline citations. I would recommend that this be fixed, to reexamine the article against the GA quality standards, and to submit the article through the nomination process. --RelHistBuff 12:50, 9 August 2006 (UTC)