Talk:Steven Hoggett
Steven Hoggett was nominated as a Media and drama good article, but it did not meet the good article criteria at the time (March 22, 2024, reviewed version). There are suggestions on the review page for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated. |
A fact from Steven Hoggett appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 11 June 2012 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
GA Review
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.
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
- This review is transcluded from Talk:Steven Hoggett/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Nominator: TonyTheTiger (talk · contribs)
Reviewer: Premeditated Chaos (talk · contribs) 22:44, 22 March 2024 (UTC)
Article is completely underbaked, has no prose information past 2018, and has a valid CN tag that's been standing since August 2022. As this nomination was made as part of a mass nomination in order to obtain WikiCup points, and no time has been spent by the nominator actually attempting to make it good, I do not feel it necessary to waste any more time on a spot check or detailing my rationale further. QF as it is a long way from meeting the criteria for broadness and being well-written.