Talk:Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency

(Redirected from Talk:Convention establishing the Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency)
Latest comment: 2 years ago by Extraordinary Writ in topic GA reassessment
Former good articleMultilateral Investment Guarantee Agency was one of the Social sciences and society good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
November 7, 2012Good article nomineeListed
October 30, 2022Good article reassessmentDelisted
Current status: Delisted good article

Article Revision

edit

This article is being discussed at the World Bank Group talk page. Please visit to participate in the discussion about the future of this article. --Brettbergeron 21:18, 4 November 2006 (UTC)Reply

GA Review

edit
GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Tomcat7 (talk · contribs) 13:27, 4 November 2012 (UTC)Reply

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose):   b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):  
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references):   b (citations to reliable sources):   c (OR):  
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects):   b (focused):  
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:  
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:  
  6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):   b (appropriate use with suitable captions):  
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:  

  • There are a few deep-breathing multi-clause sentences that could be split. For example "The Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency (MIGA) is an international financial institution which offers political risk insurance guarantees to help investors protect foreign direct investments made in developing countries against political risk.[1]" and "It was established in 1988 to serve as an investment insurance facility of the World Bank to help investors overcome political and other non-commercial risks and invest confidently in developing countries.[2]" - please split them
  • The language is tough but I think it is standard for economic articles.--Tomcat (7) 13:36, 7 November 2012 (UTC)Reply
I have rephrased and split the sentences you pointed out, and also shortened and rephrased some others throughout the article. John Shandy`talk 14:50, 7 November 2012 (UTC)Reply
edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:23, 12 May 2017 (UTC)Reply

edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:25, 8 February 2018 (UTC)Reply

GA reassessment

edit

The 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) · WatchWatch article reassessment pageMost recent review
Result: Delisted. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 23:35, 30 October 2022 (UTC)Reply

There is a maintenance template at the top of the article that says that the article contains self-published sources. Because of this, I believe that the article could no longer remain a good article. GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 05:11, 3 October 2022 (UTC)Reply

Delist With 14 of 24 references coming from the MIGA or the World Bank Group there is too high a ratio of use of primary sources with some paragraphs only supported by primary sources.Gusfriend (talk) 05:59, 10 October 2022 (UTC)Reply
The discussion above 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.