Talk:Sandugo/GA1

GA Reassessment

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
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 that this article has some issues that need to be urgently addressed.

• It is reasonably well written.

  a (prose): b (MoS):

The prose is poor, perhaps 5/10. The biggest problem I noticed is "with the fate of Magellan at the back of his mind". How can we possibly know that?

Commenting with regard to how we could possibly know that: The direct quote from the cited supporting source would read, "... with the fate of Magellan certainly on the back of his mind." It looks like this cited supporting source might have embellished the facts here, putting their reliability into question. -- Boracay Bill (talk) 04:19, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

In that case, the phrase should either be quoted and attributed, or rephrased.--Jackyd101 (talk) 10:04, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

• It is factually accurate and verifiable.

  a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

A hidden note in the text indicates that the symbolism section or parts of it are copyright violations. This needs to be investigated and sorted out. In any case, the section is confusing and needs to be urgently rewritten so that it makes more sense. In addition, the references are not always properly formatted and should come immediately after punctuation.--Jackyd101 (talk) 09:54, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

• It is broad in its coverage.

  a (major aspects): b (focused):

• It follows the neutral point of view policy.

  a (fair representation): b (all significant views):

See problems with symbolism section

• It is stable.

  

• It contains images, where possible, to illustrate the topic.

  a (tagged and captioned): b (lack of images does not in itself exclude GA): c (non-free images have fair use rationales):

• Overall:

  a Pass/Fail:

I will check back in no less than seven days. If progress is being made, 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 again. 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. (If you are really busy, let me know and I'll give more time. I need to know however so I can see that someone is interested in addressing these concerns.) Regards--Jackyd101 (talk) 09:54, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Nice work, I think I can confirm this article as a GA.--Jackyd101 (talk) 18:23, 12 February 2009 (UTC)