Talk:Adem Jashari
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Adem Jashari article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
| Archives: 1 |
 | The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information. |
 | Adem Jashari has been listed as one of the Warfare good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | ||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
| Current status: Good article | |||||||||||||
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion
editThe following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion:
- Adem Jashari Memorial in Prekaz January 2013 09 (cropped).jpg
- Adem Jashari Memorial in Prekaz January 2013 09.jpg
.jpg){kind=link}
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 21:25, 6 December 2021 (UTC)
A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
editThe following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 14:52, 18 February 2022 (UTC)
A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
editThe following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 18:37, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
The first sentence
editCan anyone rewrite it in a neutral way? I am not sure what words to use. Ktrimi991 (talk) 12:42, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
GA status
editI have not been able to find any indication this went through the GA review process. GA was disputed and removed, then readded with the edit summary "Nationalist vandal" [1], [2]
I have disputed the GA status because it has not been reviewed and is far from a NPOV stable GA. If an editor feels this meets GA status, please submit for a GA review at Wikipedia:Good article nominations per Wikipedia guidelines. If you find a GA review I missed, submit the dispute to Wikipedia:Good article reassessment // Timothy :: talk 03:02, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
- It seems like it has gone through a review (1, 2), although it appears to be incomplete to me. Perhaps you should reach out to the reviewer. StephenMacky1 (talk) 15:49, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
- Those comments were 13 and 10 years ago, so the there needs to be a new nomination, the article has changed far too much to continue an old review. // Timothy :: talk 23:15, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
- I agree. You can freely initiate a GAR then, so that it can get reassessed. I think that's the best way to address the status. StephenMacky1 (talk) 23:20, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks, // Timothy :: talk 23:29, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
- I agree. You can freely initiate a GAR then, so that it can get reassessed. I think that's the best way to address the status. StephenMacky1 (talk) 23:20, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
- Those comments were 13 and 10 years ago, so the there needs to be a new nomination, the article has changed far too much to continue an old review. // Timothy :: talk 23:15, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
GA Reassessment
editThe following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
- Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • • Most recent review
- Result: Kept. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 19:29, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
Significant NPOV issues and changes since article was reviewed 13yrs ago. // Timothy :: talk 23:31, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
- Please spell out the NPOV issues that you are concerned about. Thanks, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 03:17, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
- Is there meant to be two reassessments going on at the same time? (Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Adem Jashari/2) I suggest that the second one (which no-one has commented on yet) gets deleted.Nigel Ish (talk) 10:29, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
- Since the second nomination doesn't seem to be right, or even in existence, I've removed it from the talk page. Chiswick Chap (talk) 16:36, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
- It is quite un-obvious why this article should have been nominated, as it appears to be decently structured, neutrally written, and very fully cited to reliable sources. Unless there are pressing but non-obvious reasons (please state them), I'd !vote Speedy Keep. Chiswick Chap (talk) 16:38, 6 November 2023 (UTC)