Wikibooks:Featured books/Nominations/Addition/Chinese (Mandarin)

Chinese (Mandarin)
This is a fairly complete book to a good standard. RobinH 11:04, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
 * [[Image:Symbol neutral vote.svg|15px]] Neutral While this clearly has had a lot of work put into it, I feel it goes way too fast. I think that since it's a totally different script, at least at the beginning, it needs to go slower and spend far longer on each character, making it large, so one can see what it is. I don't know anything about Chinese, but the Greek Wikibook does it fantastically well, resting languidly on each letter until it goes in. But, I can't oppose, because I know nothing of Chinese, and it does look well-worked and generally professional. Regards, Celestianpower 18:39, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
 * [[Image:Symbol support vote.svg|15px]] Support Another great language book. Xania [[Image:Flag_of_Italy.svg|15px]]talk 19:59, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
 * [[Image:Symbol support vote.svg|15px]] Support There is alot of good material here, although User:Celestianpower is right that it moves quickly and could use more examples. --Whiteknight (talk) (projects) 17:36, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
 * [[Image:Symbol oppose vote.svg|15px]] Oppose There is no sign of methodology. Every lesson uses a different approach and does not build on the previous ones. Some lessons are also incorrectly named or contain little content (e. g. lesson 4). Junesun 06:35, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
 * [[Image:Symbol oppose vote.svg|15px]] Oppose This wikibook is more complete than most, but for an English speaker to learn Chinese is no simple task. This book needs to be much better before it is useful. Hoogli 14:28, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Not done Three votes for (including the nomination), two votes against, 1 neutral. There is no community consensus on this matter, and it is appearing that no consensus will be reached in a reasonable amount of time. Opposition votes cite the speed of progression though the book as being too steep, no consistant narrative, and improperly named pages. These issues should be addressed before the book is nominated again. --Whiteknight (Page) (Talk) 14:05, 8 June 2007 (UTC)