Talk:Banská Bystrica/GA1

GA Reassessment

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Delisting. There is too much work to do by myself. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 14:26, 11 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Doing a review as it appears there may be some issues, and there has been a request for a GAR since Sept 2013. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 09:56, 27 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Tick box

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Is it reasonably well written?
A. Prose is clear and concise, without copyvios, or spelling and grammar errors:

B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
A. Has an appropriate reference section:

B. Citation to reliable sources where necessary:

C. No original research:
Is it broad in its coverage?
A. Major aspects:

B. Focused:
Is it neutral?
Fair representation without bias:
Is it stable?
No edit wars, etc:
Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:

B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
Overall:
Pass or Fail:

Comments on GA criteria

Pass

There is a reference section. Some tidying up needs doing, but nothing serious. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 10:00, 27 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Article is stable. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 10:01, 27 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I have no immediate concerns regarding prose - while not being of a high standard, it appears adequate to convey the required information. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 10:11, 27 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Focus. No section, other than possibly Etymology, seems overlong or overly detailed, though some trimming of weather and population statistics would be worthwhile. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 10:43, 27 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Bias. There are no obvious signs of bias. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 10:46, 27 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Query

Sourcing not yet checked, though I note that previous editors have flagged concerns regarding citing. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 10:08, 27 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fail

MoS issues. WP:Lead does not adequately summarise the article. Images and media are cluttered and squeeze text, and spill over into adjacent sections: WP:LAYIM. There are questionable use of lists, and some sections have inappropriate sub-sections which inhibit flow of reading per WP:LAYOUT. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 10:06, 27 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Article has been tagged with sourcing concerns since October 2012, which is grounds for immediate failure per WP:GA?. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 14:00, 11 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

General comments

Images not yet individually checked for copyright issues as image use may need to be reduced and/or adjusted. When appropriate image use has been identified, I'll do an individual check. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 10:13, 27 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

On hold

There are sufficient concerns regarding the MoS issues to put the GA listing in jeopardy. While there are aspects of the GA criteria I've not yet fully looked into, I'm putting the review on hold for the standard initial seven days and notifying significant contributors, in order to allow work to start on addressing the concerns. Meanwhile I'll do some background reading to see if major aspects of the topic are covered, and to check out sourcing. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 10:50, 27 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No progress. WikiProjects informed. Unless someone objects, the article will be delisted in seven days. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 10:18, 4 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delisting

With several concerns regarding failing to meet GA criteria including sourcing concerns dating back to October 2012, and no editors showing an interest in helping out resolve the issues, I am delisting. When concerns have been addressed then the article can be renominated. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 14:26, 11 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]