Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Niagara Falls/archive1

Niagara Falls

Fine article, on a natural wonder which has been considered "touristy" for so long that it's easy to forget what a spectacular place it is. After a (re)visit this year and some research, I added material (mostly to the history sections), and JamesT delivered some good off-copyright pix from the Canadian archives. For uniformity I elected to capitalize the "Falls" whenever it clearly refers to "Niagara Falls" proper. I believe this is now "feature" quality.Sfahey 02:49, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)

• Minor object. It's pretty good right now, but I'm missing a section about the Falls in popular culture. There's several films that feature the falls, and David Copperfield can't just be left out. If some references to those are added, I'm happy to support this one. [[User:MacGyverMagic|

Mgm|^(talk)]] 09:45, Dec 6, 2004 (UTC)

• Support, I'll add David Copperfield myself, once I've tracked down some details. [[User:MacGyverMagic|Mgm|^(talk)]] 20:40, Dec 7, 2004 (UTC)

• done,srf

• Minor object. This looks pretty good, but the lead section needs to be expanded to give a better summary of the article. See Wikipedia:Lead section Jeronimo 08:07, 7 Dec 2004 (UTC)

• done,srf

Support. Jeronimo 07:56, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)

• support, a very nicely written and paced article. informative.
• Support. Mentions all key aspects of the falls in ordered way. Superm401 00:27, 13 Dec 2004 (UTC)
• Support. I had some reservations about the Origns section, but user Pollinator fixed that (while I was thinking about working on it) and did a good job. Would like a bit more bibliographic info in the reference section, but that's a minor quibble. Great article. -Vsmith 01:26, 13 Dec 2004 (UTC)
• Support. Very well done. - Taxman 18:36, Dec 13, 2004 (UTC)
• Support; covers everything clearly and succinctly. Radagast 14:08, Dec 14, 2004 (UTC)
• Support. Good work. [[User:COGDEN|COGDEN^(talk)]] 22:16, Dec 14, 2004 (UTC)