Main | Criteria | Instructions | Nominations | July Backlog Drive | Mentorship | Discussion | Reassessment | Report |
This is the discussion page for good article nominations (GAN) and the good articles process in general. To ask a question or start a discussion about the good article nomination process, click the Add topic link above. Please check and see if your question may already be answered; click the link to the Frequently asked questions below or search the Archives below. If you are here to discuss concerns with a specific review, please consider discussing things with the reviewer first before posting here.
![]() | See the Frequently asked questions (FAQ) |
![]() | To help centralise discussions and keep related topics together, several other GA talk pages redirect here. |
1,
2,
3,
4,
5,
6,
7,
8,
9,
10 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30 31, 32 |
GA: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16 Reassessment: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 Nominations/Instructions: 1 Search archives |
This page has archives. Sections older than 7 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
Kzyx is a relatively new editor and hasn't been editing since 24 June. The page itself isn't yet at GA standards. What shall I do with the review? ( Talk:Fu Wuji/GA1) 141 Pr -\ contribs/- 20:27, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
I noticed that Breonna Taylor just got nominated for GA and then quickpassed. Both users here are relatively new editors; those being Nickscoby, the nominator, and DeadlyRampage26, the reviewer.
Obviously, we need more GANs and GANs reviewers and I'm happy when new people get into it - but there's certain articles that need more care with the review, especially for controversial or complex subjects; and we need very experienced reviewers for a nominator's first time approaching a GA and vice versa. There is, notably, no evidence that there was a source spot check of any sort performed.
The article is certainly in a good shape for a topic like this, but I feel like this is one really need experienced folks to peer over before we can count this as a proper GA. Generalissima ( talk) (it/she) 01:45, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Good article review circles is still promising, but I notice that its coordinator User:GMH Melbourne has been less active lately. If I can make a suggestion, we should probably add one or two more coordinators, and then maybe add a link to it somewhere so people familiar with both nominating and reviewing can find it. Thebiguglyalien ( talk) 08:27, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
Can someone check my review for
Communism in the Philippines, any help will be appreciated!
🍗TheNugg
eteer🍗
03:16, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
🍗TheNugg
eteer🍗
04:08, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
🍗TheNugg
eteer🍗
04:05, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
🍗TheNugg
eteer🍗
04:21, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
Can someone check another review for
2022 Comhairle nan Eilean Siar election, any help will be appreciated!
🍗TheNugg
eteer🍗
09:24, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
🍗TheNugg
eteer🍗
09:47, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
I would appreciate guidance about this review. I'm happy to re-nominate, I'm just unsure of the correct way forward. I've sorted most of the comments that I can but there were a few things that I disagreed with and would have preferred the opportunity to respond rather than having it failed. I have left comments on the review page about the points raised. Tagging the review so they are aware ( TheNuggeteer). Stevie fae Scotland ( talk) 10:31, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
Looking for some feedback on the recent review I completed of MidCity SmashedBurger before I start another GA review. I am quite nervous I am going beyond the scope of GA, and would appreciate some line drawing. Rollinginhisgrave ( talk) 18:30, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
Earlier today I quickfailed the page Arleta Library Bakery & Cafe. I did this as I believe the article requires a significant rewrite to meet the GA criteria. It looked like this at the time of review. The co-nominators strongly disagree with the quickfail and many of the comments I made in the review, and after this discussion they renominated the article. They noted some criticisms of how I went about the quickfail here. I am avoiding closing any nominations until I receive feedback to avoid reproducing possible issues. Rollinginhisgrave ( talk) 06:06, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
Main | Criteria | Instructions | Nominations | July Backlog Drive | Mentorship | Discussion | Reassessment | Report |
This is the discussion page for good article nominations (GAN) and the good articles process in general. To ask a question or start a discussion about the good article nomination process, click the Add topic link above. Please check and see if your question may already be answered; click the link to the Frequently asked questions below or search the Archives below. If you are here to discuss concerns with a specific review, please consider discussing things with the reviewer first before posting here.
![]() | See the Frequently asked questions (FAQ) |
![]() | To help centralise discussions and keep related topics together, several other GA talk pages redirect here. |
1,
2,
3,
4,
5,
6,
7,
8,
9,
10 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30 31, 32 |
GA: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16 Reassessment: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 Nominations/Instructions: 1 Search archives |
This page has archives. Sections older than 7 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
Kzyx is a relatively new editor and hasn't been editing since 24 June. The page itself isn't yet at GA standards. What shall I do with the review? ( Talk:Fu Wuji/GA1) 141 Pr -\ contribs/- 20:27, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
I noticed that Breonna Taylor just got nominated for GA and then quickpassed. Both users here are relatively new editors; those being Nickscoby, the nominator, and DeadlyRampage26, the reviewer.
Obviously, we need more GANs and GANs reviewers and I'm happy when new people get into it - but there's certain articles that need more care with the review, especially for controversial or complex subjects; and we need very experienced reviewers for a nominator's first time approaching a GA and vice versa. There is, notably, no evidence that there was a source spot check of any sort performed.
The article is certainly in a good shape for a topic like this, but I feel like this is one really need experienced folks to peer over before we can count this as a proper GA. Generalissima ( talk) (it/she) 01:45, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Good article review circles is still promising, but I notice that its coordinator User:GMH Melbourne has been less active lately. If I can make a suggestion, we should probably add one or two more coordinators, and then maybe add a link to it somewhere so people familiar with both nominating and reviewing can find it. Thebiguglyalien ( talk) 08:27, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
Can someone check my review for
Communism in the Philippines, any help will be appreciated!
🍗TheNugg
eteer🍗
03:16, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
🍗TheNugg
eteer🍗
04:08, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
🍗TheNugg
eteer🍗
04:05, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
🍗TheNugg
eteer🍗
04:21, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
Can someone check another review for
2022 Comhairle nan Eilean Siar election, any help will be appreciated!
🍗TheNugg
eteer🍗
09:24, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
🍗TheNugg
eteer🍗
09:47, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
I would appreciate guidance about this review. I'm happy to re-nominate, I'm just unsure of the correct way forward. I've sorted most of the comments that I can but there were a few things that I disagreed with and would have preferred the opportunity to respond rather than having it failed. I have left comments on the review page about the points raised. Tagging the review so they are aware ( TheNuggeteer). Stevie fae Scotland ( talk) 10:31, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
Looking for some feedback on the recent review I completed of MidCity SmashedBurger before I start another GA review. I am quite nervous I am going beyond the scope of GA, and would appreciate some line drawing. Rollinginhisgrave ( talk) 18:30, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
Earlier today I quickfailed the page Arleta Library Bakery & Cafe. I did this as I believe the article requires a significant rewrite to meet the GA criteria. It looked like this at the time of review. The co-nominators strongly disagree with the quickfail and many of the comments I made in the review, and after this discussion they renominated the article. They noted some criticisms of how I went about the quickfail here. I am avoiding closing any nominations until I receive feedback to avoid reproducing possible issues. Rollinginhisgrave ( talk) 06:06, 19 July 2024 (UTC)