Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Mercedes-Benz 450SEL 6.9/archive1
Appearance
Re-nomination of an article I wrote some time ago. It's going through peer review and has been reworked quite a bit as such. - Lucky 6.9 23:10, 10 Aug 2004 (UTC)
object. lead section much too long in proportion to the rest of the article.Fixed. --Jiang 23:30, 10 Aug 2004 (UTC)Yeah, that looked funny to me as well. I've added a chapter heading to separate the opening. Looks much better, IMHO.- Lucky 6.9 01:23, 11 Aug 2004 (UTC)- Support. I think I remember it's previous nomination - the article looks familiar. Anyways, very interesting. Always, no matter the topic, I like when a Wikipedia (or any other encyclopaedia) article is interesting. Zoney 13:16, 11 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- Support. Well-written. [[User:Meelar|Meelar (talk)]] 14:23, 2004 Aug 11 (UTC)
- Support. Actually I thought it already passed the last time! Securiger 16:07, 11 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- Object - photo does not have license information. --mav 06:38, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- I just discovered while adding a taxonomical spec list that the photo also links to Sedan (car). - Lucky 6.9 07:36, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- Lots more taxonomic details added and other details as well. I'd have to add the recommended tire pressures to get it any more detailed. :^) - Lucky 6.9 18:49, 19 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Object slightly. Good stuff, but one troubling sentence is "Today, a 6.9 is a rare and highly collectible yet reasonably priced automobile". Making such a seeminly contradictory statement begs for elaboration. What are prices for them today? If they fetch high prices then what makes them reasonably priced?- Taxman 22:38, Aug 19, 2004 (UTC)- Glad you pointed that out. Now that you've mentioned it, there's a missing line from a previous edit stating that ultra-cherry 6.9s go for about $20,000 in the States, but the market is on its face. A super-nice 6.9 might fetch nearly half that right now. I'll make a tweak to that. Thanks for pointing that out. - Lucky 6.9 01:44, 20 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- Fixed the section in question. - Lucky 6.9 01:53, 20 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- I like the clarifications. I do think though that while the specifications are very valuable information, that they don't fit that well into the article, and the table looks a little awkward there. Moving it into a separate article referenced here would be perfect I think. With that I fully support. Good, detailed article on a unique car. - Taxman 14:28, Aug 20, 2004 (UTC)
- Fixed the section in question. - Lucky 6.9 01:53, 20 Aug 2004 (UTC)