Sailor Moon
- Article ( | visual edit | history) · Article talk ( | history) · Watch • • Most recent review
- Result: Procedurally closed
CMD (
talk)
16:16, 19 May 2021 (UTC)
Since the previous assessment and delisting of this article, I have seemingly noticed that the community has made great strides in performing whatever cleanup and corrections needed to meet the criteria for GA. At the time of this article's delisting in 2013, I had noticed the article had been subjected to much fancruft in text and citations, such as referencing only blogs and/or fansites, which contained zero encyclopedia-appropriate material and original research. In today's observation, the fancruft all but does not exist (if not, at a miniscule level), and the references are only news sources without linking to fansites and/or original research. I might not fully understand if this was the reason for the 2013 delisting, but I would like to leave this reevaluation to the community to decide.-- Loyalmoonie ( talk) 05:33, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
- If you are looking to re-promote the article, shouldn't this be done via a good article nomination? Link20XX ( talk) 16:33, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
- Anyway, Loyalmoonie, if you are trying to bring this back to GA, it's not super far off. There is some unsourced statements and maintenance tags in media but other than that, you could probably nominate it. Link20XX ( talk) 00:21, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
- Procedural close - This is a process for discussing if GAs should be delisted. WP:GAN is the process for getting an article listed as a GA. This is not the correct process. Hog Farm Talk 06:25, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
- My apologies. I was unaware.-- Loyalmoonie ( talk) 05:05, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Sailor Moon
- Article ( | visual edit | history) · Article talk ( | history) · Watch • • Most recent review
- Result: Procedurally closed
CMD (
talk)
16:16, 19 May 2021 (UTC)
Since the previous assessment and delisting of this article, I have seemingly noticed that the community has made great strides in performing whatever cleanup and corrections needed to meet the criteria for GA. At the time of this article's delisting in 2013, I had noticed the article had been subjected to much fancruft in text and citations, such as referencing only blogs and/or fansites, which contained zero encyclopedia-appropriate material and original research. In today's observation, the fancruft all but does not exist (if not, at a miniscule level), and the references are only news sources without linking to fansites and/or original research. I might not fully understand if this was the reason for the 2013 delisting, but I would like to leave this reevaluation to the community to decide.-- Loyalmoonie ( talk) 05:33, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
- If you are looking to re-promote the article, shouldn't this be done via a good article nomination? Link20XX ( talk) 16:33, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
- Anyway, Loyalmoonie, if you are trying to bring this back to GA, it's not super far off. There is some unsourced statements and maintenance tags in media but other than that, you could probably nominate it. Link20XX ( talk) 00:21, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
- Procedural close - This is a process for discussing if GAs should be delisted. WP:GAN is the process for getting an article listed as a GA. This is not the correct process. Hog Farm Talk 06:25, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
- My apologies. I was unaware.-- Loyalmoonie ( talk) 05:05, 10 May 2021 (UTC)