This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Sociology Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sociology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of sociology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SociologyWikipedia:WikiProject SociologyTemplate:WikiProject Sociologysociology articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Psychology Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Psychology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Psychology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PsychologyWikipedia:WikiProject PsychologyTemplate:WikiProject Psychologypsychology articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Systems Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Systems, which collaborates on articles related to systems and systems science.SystemsWikipedia:WikiProject SystemsTemplate:WikiProject SystemsSystems articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is not associated with a particular field. Fields are listed on the template page.

Duocentric social network was nominated as a Social sciences and society good article, but it did not meet the good article criteria at the time (March 29, 2020). There are suggestions on the review page for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated.

This review is transcluded from Talk:Duocentric social network/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Buidhe ( talk · contribs) 05:01, 29 March 2020 (UTC) reply

Unfortunately, this article is quick fail eligible due to containing unsourced information which may be original research. Also, the nominator has not been active since last year. The article may be nominated again if all information has a clear source and the nominator has ascertained that no original research is employed. b uidh e 05:01, 29 March 2020 (UTC) reply