This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Norfolk, Virginia 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, 2 |
Norfolk, Virginia was one of the Geography and places 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. | |||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
Current status: Delisted good article |
This level-5 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||
|
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) 15:16, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
Month error
edit“In September 1959, seventeen black children entered six previously segregated Norfolk public schools.”
The date is incorrect.
It was January, 1959.
- Fixed Reliable sources say it was February - I fixed it.--Mojo Hand (talk) 13:39, 4 September 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 • • GAN review not found
- Result: Delisted. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 15:33, 30 December 2023 (UTC)
This 2008 listing contains significant uncited material and has not been adequately updated (census figures from 2010, citations from the mid-2000s being used for current events, etc.) ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 02:54, 17 December 2023 (UTC)
- There's also a fair bit of puffery, needless adjectives, boosterism, and the like. So I think currently, it does not pass on the neutrality criterion. I'll try to tidy some of that up. Seraphimblade Talk to me 21:45, 19 December 2023 (UTC)