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 removed by Gimmetrow 04:59, 3 April 2010 [1].

• Featured article review/Chicago Bears/archive1

Notified: Happyman22, StarScream1007, Zzyzx11, WikiProject National Football, WikiProject Chicago Bears, WikiProject Chicago.

Found this August 2006 FA at FLC talk, of all places. It was mentioned there how this was a likely candidate for an FAR, and I agree 100% after looking at it. There are major problems regarding references (both lack of them and dead links) and prose, among other things; this gives a good summary of several issues. In addition, the non-free images require a check, as standards are different now than they were in 2006 (or so I'm told), and I see a few sources of questionable reliability. Unfortunately, this is a long way from meeting 2010 FA criteria. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 20:19, 3 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I endorse this summary, per my comments on the talk page and at FLC. I think it's worth repeating that on top of the technical issues and sourcing, this could do with a copyedit. WFCforLife (talk) 21:45, 3 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:1924bears.jpg: I'm not quite clear on why this image is public domain. Does the uploader own the original image? DrKiernan (talk) 13:23, 4 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment. Please add alt text to images; see WP:ALT. Eubulides (talk) 00:47, 5 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Featured article criterion of concern are prose, sourcing, images YellowMonkey (vote in the Southern Stars and White Ferns supermodel photo poll) 00:52, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Delist - No Work done from what I can tell. GamerPro64 (talk) 20:46, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delist – None of the issues brought up here by myself and the others have been addressed. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 23:05, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delist Clearly no one can be arsed to do anything about it. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Many otters • One bat • One hammer)} 23:54, 25 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delist per issues raised above. In addition, I see WP:ACCESS issues in the table and unsourced POV statements/paragraphs littered throughout the article (e.g. "The Bears dominated the league in the early years"), and the "2004–present: Lovie Smith era" section of the article degenerates into proseline, with no real flow. Dabomb87 (talk) 14:37, 27 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.