This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Remurmur (talk | contribs) at 15:56, 8 December 2008 (Rate.). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 15:56, 8 December 2008 by Remurmur (talk | contribs) (Rate.)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)History of the Encyclopædia Britannica was nominated as a good article, but it did not meet the good article criteria at the time (December 8, 2008). There are suggestions on the review page for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated. |
Chicago B‑class Low‑importance | ||||||||||
|
Quote template?
Hi all, I've been experimenting with {{cquote}} and {{bquote}} for this article; which one looks better? Should we also try {{rquote}}? Open to any and all ideas, Willow 21:09, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
Fine article
Well done on this. I know it was transferred from the main article, so there were more involved. It's a good read and balances heavy facts with curious details and quotes, and has a goldilocks balance on use of citations. I made a few small edits (forgot to sign in). Too tired to have a look at the quote templates.--Shtove 19:18, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
GA Review
- This review is transcluded from Talk:History of the Encyclopædia Britannica/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
This article does not meet the good article criteria and has too many issues. It has therefore failed its nomination. Issues include but are not limited to:
- Insufficient references, especially for quotes
- "Historical context"
- "1st edition"
- "1st edition"
- "3rd edition"
- "4th edition"
- etc.
Once these issues have been resolved, feel free to renominate the article. Thanks! Gary King (talk) 01:13, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
Categories: