| Revision as of 05:06, 14 October 2024 editZxcvbnm (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Page movers, Pending changes reviewers61,811 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 15:21, 1 November 2024 edit undoAirshipJungleman29 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Page movers, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers, Template editors43,420 edits close GAR Misplaced Pages:Good article reassessment/Dr. Mario/1 as keep (GANReviewTool) | ||
| (4 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| ===]=== | ===]=== | ||
| {{atopg}} | |||
| : {{al|Dr. Mario|noname=yes}} • <span class="plainlinksneverexpand"></span> • ] | : {{al|Dr. Mario|noname=yes}} • <span class="plainlinksneverexpand"></span> • ] | ||
| : <span>{{#ifeq:{{PAGENAME}}|Good article reassessment/Dr. Mario/1|]}} '''Result''': Kept.</span> ] (]) 15:21, 1 November 2024 (UTC)<br/> | |||
| : {{GAR/current}}<br/> | |||
| The "Legacy" section is my biggest concern: the first paragraph is uncited, while the rest of the paragraphs are an assortment of appearances in other media. There are also some uncited statements in other parts of the article. ] (]) 03:56, 14 October 2024 (UTC) | The "Legacy" section is my biggest concern: the first paragraph is uncited, while the rest of the paragraphs are an assortment of appearances in other media. There are also some uncited statements in other parts of the article. ] (]) 03:56, 14 October 2024 (UTC) | ||
| *'''Note''' The version when it was a GAN had no uncited things. So the question is, would it be impossible to revert the article to that state and then update as necessary or would it need more major work? ] (]) 05:06, 14 October 2024 (UTC) | *'''Note''' The version when it was a GAN had no uncited things. So the question is, would it be impossible to revert the article to that state and then update as necessary or would it need more major work? ] (]) 05:06, 14 October 2024 (UTC) | ||
| :*It's probably not very desirable to wipe out a decade's worth of edits with a wave of a wand. <span style="background:black;padding:1px 4px">] ]</span> 15:56, 14 October 2024 (UTC) | |||
| :*:Looking at the originally listed version in 2011, I don't think that would even be sufficient. I'm not sure that version should have even been listed as was (though I am not saying it should have failed instead). That version also has a completely uncited paragraph in '''Legacy'''. Perhaps Salvidrim! can correct me if I am displaying ignorance of the rules working differently here, since he is the original nominator. ] <sup> ] </sup> 19:12, 16 October 2024 (UTC) | |||
| :::*{{re|MFTP Dan}} It was only recently that GA required a citation after every paragraph (with some exceptions, like the lead). Articles were not "grandfathered" into this requirement, so GAs promoted before this change might require fixing up to meet this higher standard. If there was one or two minor citation concerns, I would not consider bringing an article to GAR. With this article, I thought the amount of uncited text was too much for the article to be considered GA at that time. If someone is willing to fill in the missing citations, I can re-review. ] (]) 19:27, 16 October 2024 (UTC) | |||
| {{outdent}}It seems like most of the citation concerns have been resolved. I also recommend that an interested editor read through the prose and split up the paragraphs, as many of them are too long. Typically I recommend a maximum of six sentences. ] (]) 13:03, 29 October 2024 (UTC) | |||
| {{abot}} | |||
Latest revision as of 15:21, 1 November 2024
Dr. Mario
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 • Watch article reassessment page • Most recent review
- Result: Kept. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 15:21, 1 November 2024 (UTC)
The "Legacy" section is my biggest concern: the first paragraph is uncited, while the rest of the paragraphs are an assortment of appearances in other media. There are also some uncited statements in other parts of the article. Z1720 (talk) 03:56, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- Note The version when it was a GAN had no uncited things. So the question is, would it be impossible to revert the article to that state and then update as necessary or would it need more major work? ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 05:06, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- It's probably not very desirable to wipe out a decade's worth of edits with a wave of a wand. Ben · Salvidrim! ✉ 15:56, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- Looking at the originally listed version in 2011, I don't think that would even be sufficient. I'm not sure that version should have even been listed as was (though I am not saying it should have failed instead). That version also has a completely uncited paragraph in Legacy. Perhaps Salvidrim! can correct me if I am displaying ignorance of the rules working differently here, since he is the original nominator. mftp dan 19:12, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- @MFTP Dan: It was only recently that GA required a citation after every paragraph (with some exceptions, like the lead). Articles were not "grandfathered" into this requirement, so GAs promoted before this change might require fixing up to meet this higher standard. If there was one or two minor citation concerns, I would not consider bringing an article to GAR. With this article, I thought the amount of uncited text was too much for the article to be considered GA at that time. If someone is willing to fill in the missing citations, I can re-review. Z1720 (talk) 19:27, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- It's probably not very desirable to wipe out a decade's worth of edits with a wave of a wand. Ben · Salvidrim! ✉ 15:56, 14 October 2024 (UTC)