User:Mujinga/GAT

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GOOD ARTICLE THOUGHTS

Classifying[edit]

The sections for classifying things are really restrictive and badly formed. They are innately conservative since they are based on what got set first. I don't why a more usual open classificatory system has been used. We need a tree structure.

Examples:

  • Weird that parks are under sports/recreation and not geography/places eg Pelham Bay Park
  • Where to put Exodus Collective?
  • Where to put Self-managed social centres in the United Kingdom?
  • Where to put We Are Here (collective)?
  • Section: Royalty, nobility and heraldry !? on the same level as Places? - should this not be under People and Culture sections?
  • Section: Video games ?! on the same level as Art and architecture? - should all these things not be under Culture?
  • Section: Culture, sociology and psychology - a catch all category if ever there was one.
  • eg where does a singer go?
  • eg where does a music venue go?
  • Penny (British decimal coin) = Social sciences and society / Economics and business / Numismatics and currencies ?!
  • sports and recreation is a right mess, where to put a rugby player - FOUND it, under football lol, miscellania can be filtered to other sections etc etc
  • eg where does yoga go? = Recreation not Biology!?

Reviews[edit]

Some reviews take months which just seems like a complete piss-take. This clearly contravenes the guidelines and point towards the process being very subjective, depending on the whim of the reviewer.

Examples (nothing against the articles themselves, I'm talking about the process here):

Other reviews are so fast as to also raise certain concerns :

Dubious status[edit]

Panzer Aces[edit]

This seems to be in obvious need of reassessment and I left a note on the talkpage in January which didn't get a response. Rater gives a C grade. From reading the article, I wasn't actually sure if the books are regarded fiction or nonfiction, but in any case, the article doesn't follow the guidelines at Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Novels or Wikipedia:WikiProject Books/Non-fiction article, whichever apply. Everything is very unclear, I would suggest there needs to be at the very least a synopsis of each book in the series. The article comes in at 10k so definitely there's a need for expansion.

Wikipedia:Content assessment

  • Immediate Fail: Broad in its coverage
  • B-Criteria - The article reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain obvious omissions or inaccuracies.

Compare to:

Wikipedia:Good_articles/Language_and_literature#Language_and_literature_2

Warships[edit]

Smol[edit]

  • Ýdalir
  • M-105 (Michigan highway)
  • Djibouti at the 2012 Summer Paralympics
  • Manasser Biset
  • Coughs and sneezes spread diseases
  • Sibyl of Falaise