Article ( | visual edit | history) · Article talk ( | history) · Watch
This article no longer meets the GA criteria. The article could do with a copyedit, but this is not a matter than concerns me much. The main problem is that the article is for the most part unreferenced (failing criterion 2). Sections such as 'basic beliefs' and 'history' have few, if any, in-line references. There is also a confusing mix of footnote and Harvard-style inline citations. Online references are incorrectly formatted. The article also fails criterion 1a with a very short lead that does not summarize the article. Finally I have minor concerns regarding criterion 3a, since the article leaves out the establishment of the religion almost entiely, and simply "askes" the reader to refer to the article on Zoroaster.

I will leave this reassessment open for a week. If not major work to start referencing and reworking the lead is initiated, I will delist the article. Note that the criteria have changed since the article was listed in 2006, and it is much harder (particularly regarding referencing) to get an article to GA status today. Arsenikk ^(talk) 14:52, 29 April 2009 (UTC) reply

• Question: what is the matter with Harvard, or its "style"? Wikipedia is not worth people's trouble, don't you see why Zoroastrianism has gone down this road? No Zoroastrian would have anything to do with it. I hope your suggestions and actions help with it. What a sad day this is.
• RevAntonio ( talk) 04:14, 6 May 2009 (UTC) reply

None of the matters have been seen to in the week, so I have delisted the article. If the article later meets the GA criteria, feel free to nominate it at WP:GAN. Arsenikk ^(talk) 11:32, 6 May 2009 (UTC) reply