| Revision as of 23:12, 12 August 2013 editRL0919 (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators75,590 edits agreed← Previous edit | Revision as of 00:11, 13 August 2013 edit undoSPECIFICO (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users35,510 editsNo edit summaryNext edit → | ||
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
| ::Note that the ] guideline directs us to try and bring a GA quality level back to the article. The point is not to remove GA status (though this must be done if it does not improve) but to improve it sufficiently. ] (]) 23:06, 12 August 2013 (UTC) | ::Note that the ] guideline directs us to try and bring a GA quality level back to the article. The point is not to remove GA status (though this must be done if it does not improve) but to improve it sufficiently. ] (]) 23:06, 12 August 2013 (UTC) | ||
| :::Yes, this is my hope as well. I also wanted to let the disputes resolve themselves first, but they seem locked in. Maybe more eyes on the article will shake them loose. --] (]) 23:12, 12 August 2013 (UTC) | :::Yes, this is my hope as well. I also wanted to let the disputes resolve themselves first, but they seem locked in. Maybe more eyes on the article will shake them loose. --] (]) 23:12, 12 August 2013 (UTC) | ||
| {{od}}I would say the current defects of the article relate to the following GA criteria: | |||
| <li>{{Misplaced Pages:Good article criteria/GAC|3}}:</li> | |||
| <ol STYLE="list-style-type: lower-alpha"> | |||
| <li>{{Misplaced Pages:Good article criteria/GAC|3a}};and</li> | |||
| <li>{{Misplaced Pages:Good article criteria/GAC|3b}}.</ol> | |||
| <li>{{Misplaced Pages:Good article criteria/GAC|4}}.</ol> | |||
| <li>{{Misplaced Pages:Good article criteria/GAC|5}}.</ol> | |||
| There's a lot more work to do on this article in order to present a fair and balanced description of Rothbard and his views. ]] 00:11, 13 August 2013 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 00:11, 13 August 2013
Murray Rothbard
- Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch article reassessment page • Most recent review
- Result pending
I was hesitant to request this, but the page has been tagged for over two months now with multiple content concerns. Talk page discussions about these do not appear to be progressing to any near-term resolution. As a result there are significant concerns about the article meeting GA criteria #2 (verifiability), #4 (neutrality) and #5 (stability). Maybe this reassessment will be the spur to get these issues taken care of, but if not, it should not continue to be portrayed as a "good article" if it doesn't meet the criteria. --RL0919 (talk) 20:26, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
- Note that the WP:GAR guideline directs us to try and bring a GA quality level back to the article. The point is not to remove GA status (though this must be done if it does not improve) but to improve it sufficiently. Binksternet (talk) 23:06, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
- Yes, this is my hope as well. I also wanted to let the disputes resolve themselves first, but they seem locked in. Maybe more eyes on the article will shake them loose. --RL0919 (talk) 23:12, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
- Note that the WP:GAR guideline directs us to try and bring a GA quality level back to the article. The point is not to remove GA status (though this must be done if it does not improve) but to improve it sufficiently. Binksternet (talk) 23:06, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
I would say the current defects of the article relate to the following GA criteria:
- it addresses the main aspects of the topic;and
- it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
There's a lot more work to do on this article in order to present a fair and balanced description of Rothbard and his views. SPECIFICO talk 00:11, 13 August 2013 (UTC)