Children of Men
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 • • GAN review not found
- Result: No consensus to delist.
~~ AirshipJungleman29 (
talk)
03:17, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
This article was made a GA in 2007 and was reassessed in 2009. It is bot up to standard for a modern GA article which is a shame as the film in my opinion deserves to be Featured!
I started trying to fix things but as I go on I see more and more.
There are unfrerenced points throughout (accolades table for example), a lack of images, it doesn't follow MoS, sources in lead. I'm happy to do the work on it but I need help and as such think this needs to be delisted and go through a GAN again. It hasn't aged well this article.
Lankyant ( talk) 01:35, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
- You have cited the accolades table Lankyant; the other issues are not relevant to the GA criteria. Do you think the article meets the criteria now? ~~ AirshipJungleman29 ( talk) 12:44, 20 January 2024 (UTC)
Children of Men
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 • • GAN review not found
- Result: No consensus to delist.
~~ AirshipJungleman29 (
talk)
03:17, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
This article was made a GA in 2007 and was reassessed in 2009. It is bot up to standard for a modern GA article which is a shame as the film in my opinion deserves to be Featured!
I started trying to fix things but as I go on I see more and more.
There are unfrerenced points throughout (accolades table for example), a lack of images, it doesn't follow MoS, sources in lead. I'm happy to do the work on it but I need help and as such think this needs to be delisted and go through a GAN again. It hasn't aged well this article.
Lankyant ( talk) 01:35, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
- You have cited the accolades table Lankyant; the other issues are not relevant to the GA criteria. Do you think the article meets the criteria now? ~~ AirshipJungleman29 ( talk) 12:44, 20 January 2024 (UTC)