Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Buro Happold/1
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 • • GAN review not found
- Result: Delisted. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 23:53, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
There is lots of unreferenced text and entries in lists. The lead is also too short, and there is a lot of promotional language throughout the entire article. Z1720 (talk) 01:04, 5 August 2024 (UTC)
- Couldn't agree more. It needs quite a lot of work. Just a few quick observations:
- The Projects section contains way too many examples, many of which are unreferenced.
- The Awards section needs to be chronological and again every entry should be referenced.
- There's a lot of spammy / promotional content, some of which I have already removed.
- Lots of acronyms/initialisms used without explanation.
- I haven't done an accurate count, but based on the first 20 or so it looks like around a third of the references are to the company's own website - see both WP:INDEPENDENT and WP:PRIMARY
- 10mmsocket (talk) 10:31, 5 August 2024 (UTC)
- Delist. Eek. Queen of Hearts talk 20:16, 10 August 2024 (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.