Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Aarhus/1

Aarhus

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 • Most recent review

Result: Kept - issues have been addressed. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 12:44, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

A GA from 2014. Some uncited material that needs to be cited. Onegreatjoke (talk) 18:16, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

Will look into this over the next few days.--Ipigott (talk) 19:10, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

As far as I can see, there are no longer any unreferenced passages in the article. Please let me know, Onegreatjoke, if any further work is needed.--Ipigott (talk) 14:22, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

@Ipigott: There's "In the 1980s the city entered a period of rapid growth[clarification needed]" at the Post-World War II years section and that's it from what i can see. Onegreatjoke (talk) 16:04, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Onegreatjoke: I missed this as it was from 2017. Now OK I hope.--Ipigott (talk) 16:31, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Seems good. Though I will wait for the opinions of other people Onegreatjoke (talk) 22:07, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

• Keep Good article (heh). ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 13:48, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

• Keep - I don't quite understand what exactly needs to be addressed, "Some uncited material" is a very general comment. I'm opposed to just unlisting a GA all of a sudden. It's the easiest route. I think sources in the lead are not necessary, but other than that, at the moment, it looks like a very well-sourced, and indeed, good article. Please be more specific as to what needs to be addressed. Shahid • ^Talk2me 11:38, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

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.