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 (
|
visual edit |
history) ·
Article talk (
|
history) ·
Watch
Currently this article fails the
Good article criteria, particularly 2:
Verifiable, with no original research. There are far too many citations to books that are missing page numbers, and one section ("A way to fame") that has no citations at all. In addition, someone else has tagged the "Role in Ferdinand Marcos's 1965 presidential campaign" section as {{
too long}} so you probably need to split that into subsections. I don't know how long a typical reassessment period lasts, so let's say two weeks. If these issues are not addressed by 17 November 2018 (UTC) then the article will be delisted from GA status. —
howcheng {
chat} 03:39, 3 November 2018 (UTC)
@ Howcheng: and @ FunkMonk:, hi. I just want to flag that this is about to become (if it hasn't already become) a high traffic article due to the subject being convicted on seven corruption charges a couple of hours ago. I had earlier noted that the section on court cases needs expansion, and I'm working on that. Also, I also just realized that the entire section titled "First Lady" was skewed to the positive because the subheading "projects during", which results in text which describes projects within the time period described. A heading titled "roles during..." or "public life during..." would result in a less-skewed narrative. But that's a lot of work and I need to brace myself a bit before I dive into that. Not sure what that implies for this GA review since I don't normally involve myself in these. But I thought it was important to mention. - Alternativity ( talk) 08:55, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
Given the current state of the article, I fully support a demotion. It is Start Class, no higher. Mjroots ( talk) 17:30, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
For sure it is not GA with the overall negativity in lede ( WP:BLP violation) and the excessive WP:LEDE length. Jtbobwaysf ( talk) 18:07, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
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 (
|
visual edit |
history) ·
Article talk (
|
history) ·
Watch
Currently this article fails the
Good article criteria, particularly 2:
Verifiable, with no original research. There are far too many citations to books that are missing page numbers, and one section ("A way to fame") that has no citations at all. In addition, someone else has tagged the "Role in Ferdinand Marcos's 1965 presidential campaign" section as {{
too long}} so you probably need to split that into subsections. I don't know how long a typical reassessment period lasts, so let's say two weeks. If these issues are not addressed by 17 November 2018 (UTC) then the article will be delisted from GA status. —
howcheng {
chat} 03:39, 3 November 2018 (UTC)
@ Howcheng: and @ FunkMonk:, hi. I just want to flag that this is about to become (if it hasn't already become) a high traffic article due to the subject being convicted on seven corruption charges a couple of hours ago. I had earlier noted that the section on court cases needs expansion, and I'm working on that. Also, I also just realized that the entire section titled "First Lady" was skewed to the positive because the subheading "projects during", which results in text which describes projects within the time period described. A heading titled "roles during..." or "public life during..." would result in a less-skewed narrative. But that's a lot of work and I need to brace myself a bit before I dive into that. Not sure what that implies for this GA review since I don't normally involve myself in these. But I thought it was important to mention. - Alternativity ( talk) 08:55, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
Given the current state of the article, I fully support a demotion. It is Start Class, no higher. Mjroots ( talk) 17:30, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
For sure it is not GA with the overall negativity in lede ( WP:BLP violation) and the excessive WP:LEDE length. Jtbobwaysf ( talk) 18:07, 10 November 2018 (UTC)