Article (
|
visual edit |
history) ·
Article talk (
|
history) ·
Watch
Hello,
this article recently failed a GA assessment with no time allowed to address the reviewers comments before it was closed out. The reviewer claimed that the article contained original research because the lead and the synopsis contained no references. I began to explain that this is an inaccurate assessment, but would rather just start over ionstead of interacting with that reviewer. The reviewer also claimed that the article contained a lot of trivial information without being very specific about what they mean by that. Previously the article recieved a Peer review and passed a "Did you know?..." assessment without any such issues being commented upon. Basically I'd like a new assessment.--
Deoliveirafan (
talk) 00:50, 9 July 2015 (UTC)
However, it is rarely helpful to request a community reassessment for an article which has not had a proper review; it is usually simpler to renominate it. If some time has lapsed since a delisting or fail it is better to renominate.It's now well over two months; when you return, I suggest trying the GAN, once you've dealt with any relevant issues from the original review and the discussion above. BlueMoonset ( talk) 01:14, 21 September 2015 (UTC)
Article (
|
visual edit |
history) ·
Article talk (
|
history) ·
Watch
Hello,
this article recently failed a GA assessment with no time allowed to address the reviewers comments before it was closed out. The reviewer claimed that the article contained original research because the lead and the synopsis contained no references. I began to explain that this is an inaccurate assessment, but would rather just start over ionstead of interacting with that reviewer. The reviewer also claimed that the article contained a lot of trivial information without being very specific about what they mean by that. Previously the article recieved a Peer review and passed a "Did you know?..." assessment without any such issues being commented upon. Basically I'd like a new assessment.--
Deoliveirafan (
talk) 00:50, 9 July 2015 (UTC)
However, it is rarely helpful to request a community reassessment for an article which has not had a proper review; it is usually simpler to renominate it. If some time has lapsed since a delisting or fail it is better to renominate.It's now well over two months; when you return, I suggest trying the GAN, once you've dealt with any relevant issues from the original review and the discussion above. BlueMoonset ( talk) 01:14, 21 September 2015 (UTC)