Nish Panesar was nominated as a Media and drama good article, but it did not meet the good article criteria at the time (July 7, 2024, reviewed version). There are suggestions on the review page for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated. |
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
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.
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Dr.Swag Lord: Dr.Swag Lord, Ph.d ( talk · contribs) Hi, I'll be happy to review this article. 10:04, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not) |
---|
|
Overall: |
· · · |
Main concern: Due to the incredible poor amount of sources--mostly tabloids-- this article falls well short of a GA. I understand we're dealing with a fictional character, but there are still many WP:BLP claims in this article so strong sourcing is a must. Sourcing concerns include:
Due to the sheer amount of questionable sources, I will unfortunately need to quick fail this article. Since I am still new to GA reviews, I will let a more experienced reviewer close this. Thank you and good luck on the article! Dr. Swag Lord ( talk) 10:39, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
In fact, I think I'll have to withdraw the nomination. I won't have the time to address the issues, and I'd rather someone involved in the soap opera WikiProject cover it. Major apoloies for any inconvenience this has caused. FishLoveHam ( talk) 21:17, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
Nish Panesar was nominated as a Media and drama good article, but it did not meet the good article criteria at the time (July 7, 2024, reviewed version). There are suggestions on the review page for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated. |
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
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.
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Dr.Swag Lord: Dr.Swag Lord, Ph.d ( talk · contribs) Hi, I'll be happy to review this article. 10:04, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not) |
---|
|
Overall: |
· · · |
Main concern: Due to the incredible poor amount of sources--mostly tabloids-- this article falls well short of a GA. I understand we're dealing with a fictional character, but there are still many WP:BLP claims in this article so strong sourcing is a must. Sourcing concerns include:
Due to the sheer amount of questionable sources, I will unfortunately need to quick fail this article. Since I am still new to GA reviews, I will let a more experienced reviewer close this. Thank you and good luck on the article! Dr. Swag Lord ( talk) 10:39, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
In fact, I think I'll have to withdraw the nomination. I won't have the time to address the issues, and I'd rather someone involved in the soap opera WikiProject cover it. Major apoloies for any inconvenience this has caused. FishLoveHam ( talk) 21:17, 2 July 2024 (UTC)