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.
Fantastic! It has already gone through one extensive review with @
MrLinkinPark333. He declined to approve it further because he did not want to go through all the sources. (Which admittedly, are quite a lot -- I had to split the page because the content is so overwhelming.) I will say I not only went through nearly every source earlier this year, but I added a lot of new ones so feel confident that 98% are in good shape.
Elias (
talk) 02:28, 29 September 2022 (UTC)reply
A good start would be fixing the CS1 and CS1 maintenance errors. These are on citations 8, 28, 124, 151, 166, 170, 219, 225, 228, and 231, in addition to the first and fourth books in the further reading section. When this is done, I will review the sources via a spot-check of randomly chosen citations.
I cannot say that the issues raised at the previous nomination have been adequately considered. When the previous reviewer brought up the question of neutrality, especially in the contemporary history section, the nominator explained that the section was based on a writing project, but thought the problem fixed after correcting three (3!) sentences. The entire section needs a complete rewrite, especially as it often misses basic punctuation such as full stops or apostrophes, or basic grammar. There are in addition multiple occasions where sentences are
overly cited, large numbers of
WP:WTW, and issues with
WP:NPOV and
WP:IMPARTIAL. I cannot do anything but quick-fail this article, on the basis that it fails criteria 3 and 5 of the
Good Article quickfail criteria. I would suggest a visit to the
Guild of Copy Editors, if you find yourself unable to improve the article satisfactorily.~~
AirshipJungleman29 (
talk) 11:24, 29 September 2022 (UTC)reply
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.