Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Huntsville, Alabama/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 • • Most recent review
- Result: Agreement between both the orginal nominator and reviewer that this was a bad review, thus delist. Clyde [trout needed] 17:46, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
Last year, I nominated this article for GA and it was rightfully quickfailed. After another (albeit small) revision, it passed another review in May of this year. I have since become a much more experienced editor, and after re-reading through this upon an inquiry on the talk page, I do not believe this aligns with the GA criteria. There's a lack of page numbers on many sources in the history section, there's little independent coverage of the subjects discussed under arts and culture, and the reliability of numerous sources is questionable (e.g. RateBeer.com, Encyclopedia of Alabama, Tennessee Valley Civil War Round Table, etc). This article fails criteria points 2b and 3a. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 14:49, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
- I don't believe we've had a self-nom before; thanks for your honesty MyCatIsAChonk. Personally, it seems to me that the quality of the sources is the real smoking gun, and unfortunately it would take a lot of effort to replace all of them. Delist ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 22:41, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
- Ok, I take the self-nom part back, buidhe has apparently beaten you by a day. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 22:42, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
- I was the reviewer and I only spot-checked a handful of references. Upon a closer look, I agree with both of you that we should delist due to questionable sources. ––FormalDude (talk) 05:08, 5 November 2023 (UTC)