Talk:Erg (landform)/GA1
Latest comment: 16 years ago by Malleus Fatuorum in topic GA Reassessment
GA Reassessment
edit
In order to uphold the quality of Wikipedia:Good articles, all articles listed as Good articles are being reviewed against the GA criteria as part of the GA project quality task force. While all the hard work that has gone into this article is appreciated, unfortunately, as of October 11, 2008, this article fails to satisfy the criteria, as detailed below. For that reason, the article has been delisted from WP:GA. However, if improvements are made bringing the article up to standards, the article may be nominated at WP:GAN. If you feel this decision has been made in error, you may seek remediation at WP:GAR.
- As this article is largely a list of ergs it fails 1b of the good article criteria. It would be more suitable to nominate it at WP:Featured lists. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 14:58, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
- I disagree that the list of ergs makes up the majority of the article. Would moving the list to a separate article warrant the restoration of the article's GA status? howcheng {chat} 19:02, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
- Moving the list would certainly address my major concern, but there are other problems as well. For instance this is an article about ergs, not sand dunes, yet the Extraterrestrial ergs section is largely about dune fields on Venus and Titan, not ergs, thus failing criteria 3b. Reference #11 seems to have been moved as well. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 21:51, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
- If you read the lead paragraph, you would know that ergs are large dune fields. And the term "dune field" is only used in reference to Venus. Checking the source, the size of those fields definitely qualifies them as ergs, so I will change the wording accordingly. howcheng {chat} 17:57, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
- The lead defines a dune field as an area of sand dunes less than 125 square kilometres. If it is the case that the dune fields on Venus are greater than 125 square kilometres, should they not be called ergs then? The information on Titan is even more vague, "sand dunes". This is not an article on sand dunes or dune fields, but on ergs. If you feel that I have been overly harsh in delisting this article then I would encourage you to take your concerns to WP:GAR, or I will do so myself if you'd prefer. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 18:25, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
- If you read the lead paragraph, you would know that ergs are large dune fields. And the term "dune field" is only used in reference to Venus. Checking the source, the size of those fields definitely qualifies them as ergs, so I will change the wording accordingly. howcheng {chat} 17:57, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
- Moving the list would certainly address my major concern, but there are other problems as well. For instance this is an article about ergs, not sand dunes, yet the Extraterrestrial ergs section is largely about dune fields on Venus and Titan, not ergs, thus failing criteria 3b. Reference #11 seems to have been moved as well. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 21:51, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
- I disagree that the list of ergs makes up the majority of the article. Would moving the list to a separate article warrant the restoration of the article's GA status? howcheng {chat} 19:02, 11 October 2008 (UTC)