![]() | The Feast of the Goat has been listed as one of the Language and literature good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | |||||||||
|
![]() | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This article was the subject of an
educational assignment in Spring 2008 at the
University of British Columbia. Further details are available
on the course page. Garethshort, jen.chim, and sunnybeddow thank the FA-Team and WikiProject Novels for their help. Revision summary: 4 February, 2008, 348 revisions, 17 April, 2008. GA status achieved. |
Congratulations to all involved for your efforts on this article over the past fortnight, I have passed this article. It is of sufficiently broad in coverage, reasonably well-written, and adequately (though not perfectly) verified. I think it has enough in terms of content and breadth to be a strong candidate for featured status, but still does not read perfectly in the WP house style for my perhaps over-sensitive ears. Stricutres of no original research and attribution are more difficult to honour for literary topics where so much of the article consists in interpretation, but this is a surmountable difficulty. I recommend submitting to peer review, and wish you all the best of luck. Regards, Skomorokh 16:47, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
Article is mostly there, though there are a few minor issues that remain and should be fixed.
Other than that, the article is very good. Cheers! Dr. Cash ( talk) 18:19, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
Someone continues to make biased edits to the article, from a markedly anti-authoritarian standpoint. If we are to be a neutral platform, then we cannot demonize all governmental forms, whether or not we agree with them. BlauGraf ( talk) 12:41, 22 March 2021 (UTC)Blaugraf
![]() | The Feast of the Goat has been listed as one of the Language and literature good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | |||||||||
|
![]() | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This article was the subject of an
educational assignment in Spring 2008 at the
University of British Columbia. Further details are available
on the course page. Garethshort, jen.chim, and sunnybeddow thank the FA-Team and WikiProject Novels for their help. Revision summary: 4 February, 2008, 348 revisions, 17 April, 2008. GA status achieved. |
Congratulations to all involved for your efforts on this article over the past fortnight, I have passed this article. It is of sufficiently broad in coverage, reasonably well-written, and adequately (though not perfectly) verified. I think it has enough in terms of content and breadth to be a strong candidate for featured status, but still does not read perfectly in the WP house style for my perhaps over-sensitive ears. Stricutres of no original research and attribution are more difficult to honour for literary topics where so much of the article consists in interpretation, but this is a surmountable difficulty. I recommend submitting to peer review, and wish you all the best of luck. Regards, Skomorokh 16:47, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
Article is mostly there, though there are a few minor issues that remain and should be fixed.
Other than that, the article is very good. Cheers! Dr. Cash ( talk) 18:19, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
Someone continues to make biased edits to the article, from a markedly anti-authoritarian standpoint. If we are to be a neutral platform, then we cannot demonize all governmental forms, whether or not we agree with them. BlauGraf ( talk) 12:41, 22 March 2021 (UTC)Blaugraf