Talk:Aberdeenshire (historic)/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Vaticidalprophet (talk · contribs) 04:40, 1 July 2021 (UTC)

Apologies, but I'm going to have to quickfail this, per quickfail criteria #1 ("it is a long way from meeting any one of the six good article criteria") and #3 ("it has, or needs, cleanup banners that are unquestionably still valid"). The article is overwhelmingly taken from Britannica 1911, which by current standards is barely acceptable in articles at all now, let alone GAs. The original content has significant uncited passages/CN tags, and is frequently drawn from questionable sources (e.g. Geni.com, which is generally unreliable per User:Headbomb/unreliable -- that source is also a bare URL). This would need a substantial rewrite to meet GA criteria. Vaticidalprophet 04:40, 1 July 2021 (UTC)