Talk:William March/GA1

GA Reassessment

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Starting GA reassessment as part of the GA Sweeps process. Jezhotwells (talk) 09:18, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Checking against GA criteria

This article has been reviewed as part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles/Project quality task force in an effort to ensure all listed Good articles continue to meet the Good article criteria. In reviewing the article, I have found there are some issues that may need to be addressed, listed below. I will check back in seven days. If these issues are addressed, the article will remain listed as a Good article. Otherwise, it may be delisted (such a decision may be challenged through WP:GAR). If improved after it has been delisted, it may be nominated at WP:GAN. Feel free to drop a message on my talk page if you have any questions, and many thanks for all the hard work that has gone into this article thus far.

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose):

   • I made some copy-edits, more could be done.

   b (MoS):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references):

   • Ref #3 [1] doesn't exist at Brittanica anymore; I also found a dead link amogst the ELs, both are tagged. I replaced several others from the Internet Archive. There are some outstanding citation needed tags which need to be addressed and I have added some more to unsourced paragraphs. Jezhotwells (talk) 09:59, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

   b (citations to reliable sources):

   • All sources seem to be reliable for the purposes for which they are used. Jezhotwells (talk) 09:59, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

   c (OR):

3. It is broad in its scope.

   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:

   • On hold for seven days for above issues to be fixed. Major contributors and projects will be informed. Jezhotwells (talk) 09:59, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
   • OK, it has been nine days now, some improvements have been made, but there are still outstanding ciattion needed tags. Can these be sorted in the next 48 hours? If not, I will delist. The article can always be brought backt o WP:GAN when ready. Jezhotwells (talk) 11:15, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
   • Ok, delisted as no further work has been done. Jezhotwells (talk) 23:56, 15 August 2009 (UTC)