Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/2003 Chicago balcony collapse/1

2003 Chicago balcony collapse

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) · Watch • Watch article reassessment page • GAN review not found

Result: Delisted per consensus. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 15:36, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Per the concerns listed by Epicgenius at Talk:2003 Chicago balcony collapse#Good article reassessment, as well as my own concerns (such as the prose being inelegant and details related to each other, especially in the aftermath section, not being presented together). —Compassionate727 ^(T·C) 22:52, 3 July 2023 (UTC)

I've measured it against the GA criteria below. Will delist in just under a week if no significant improvement by then. Godtres (talk) 18:58, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

   Lead reads to me like journalism. Other problems have been identified on the talk page.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (reference section): b (inline citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):

   One citation needed tag remains. A spot check on source 1 suggests OR with the identification of the school that the children knew each other from. I presume the sources with the same text as the Wikipedia article copied it from here, not vice versa.

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   Lacks some context/explanation as identified on the talk page. Could be expanded.

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

   Neutral coverage.

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

   No edit wars.

6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

   Relevant picture, and no particular need for another one.

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   Needs work on style; perhaps some expansion with further referencing.

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.