Toolbox |
---|
This peer review discussion has been closed. |
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.
This article was previously promoted to Good Article after a long and thorough GA review process, but has since been delisted because a single editor believes that it is full of "a large amount of textual plagiarism", and for several complicated reasons there was no real effort to contest this statement. I am now attempting to get the article promoted back to GA, but the editor behind the delisting has made it clear that they will obstruct attempts to do so without addressing their concerns. They have also refused to help identify the problem in a way that could be directly addressed, and the copyvio tool is not picking up any violations, so I am hoping that other editors will be able to help identify these plagiarism issues in the article so they can be rectified. Any other insights that could help with improving the article and getting it promoted again are also welcome. Thanks guys, adamstom97 ( talk) 07:49, 5 October 2019 (UTC)
a single editor believes that it is full of "a large amount of textual plagiarism") and do not attempt to deceive your peers with such misleading statements.
That's all I've got to say. Well done thus far!
Thatoneweirdwikier
Say hi
20:03, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
Toolbox |
---|
This peer review discussion has been closed. |
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.
This article was previously promoted to Good Article after a long and thorough GA review process, but has since been delisted because a single editor believes that it is full of "a large amount of textual plagiarism", and for several complicated reasons there was no real effort to contest this statement. I am now attempting to get the article promoted back to GA, but the editor behind the delisting has made it clear that they will obstruct attempts to do so without addressing their concerns. They have also refused to help identify the problem in a way that could be directly addressed, and the copyvio tool is not picking up any violations, so I am hoping that other editors will be able to help identify these plagiarism issues in the article so they can be rectified. Any other insights that could help with improving the article and getting it promoted again are also welcome. Thanks guys, adamstom97 ( talk) 07:49, 5 October 2019 (UTC)
a single editor believes that it is full of "a large amount of textual plagiarism") and do not attempt to deceive your peers with such misleading statements.
That's all I've got to say. Well done thus far!
Thatoneweirdwikier
Say hi
20:03, 8 December 2019 (UTC)