Article ( | visual edit | history) · Article talk ( | history) · Watch
Reviewer: KAP03 ( talk · contribs) 16:15, 20 May 2017 (UTC) reply

• Quick fail Contains two {{ current}} maintenance tags which are still valid. - KAP03( ^{Talk • Contributions • Email}) 16:15, 20 May 2017 (UTC) reply

@ KAP03: Are these not just article message templates, and not actual maintenance tags? Emir of Wikipedia ( talk) 11:18, 21 May 2017 (UTC) reply

I agree this review should be quick failed. A quick look at the history sees quite a bit of back-and-forth over the past 24 hours about the Saudi Arabia visit, with several large-scale reverts. That instantly disqualifies it under the "stability" part of the GA criteria. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 14:29, 22 May 2017 (UTC) reply

• I would dispute a B-class assessment at this point. Let alone a good-article assessment. I concur with the quick fail. SecretName101 ( talk) 01:27, 24 May 2017 (UTC) reply
• Unless there's a consensus to do something dramatic (such as to block changes for the entire month of June), it will change far too quickly for any of these to be worthwhile. Power~enwiki ( talk) 20:36, 24 May 2017 (UTC) reply

• Very well then. I say the consensus has been reached to Fail the nomination. GoAnimateFan199Pro ( talk) 03:07, 25 May 2017 (UTC) reply