Talk:Grand National/GA2

GA Review

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

Reviewer: KnowIG (talk) 14:16, 3 March 2011 (UTC) Quick Fail 1.The article completely lacks reliable sources – see Wikipedia:Verifiability.[2] Reason why, from the heading the race which never was there are hardly any sources. Huge bits of prose unsourced. And even then until the peoples race most of it is a link to a picture. Also the RP links could be put into the article 2.The topic is treated in an obviously non-neutral way – see Wikipedia:Neutral point of view.[3] 3.There are cleanup banners that are obviously still valid. 4.The article is or has been the subject of ongoing or recent, unresolved edit wars. 5.The article specifically concerns a rapidly unfolding current event with a definite endpoint. [reply]

So for the lack of sources and bare url's I am going to have to fail the article. On the reason that when nomination takes place for GA since it takes so long to be reviewed, a bit of work on the article or work on one section would be acceptable. But the issues here are unfortunatly widespread. I'll put a detailed list on your talk page later. Please feel free to improve the article and renominate it. Thanks for the nomination KnowIG (talk) 14:16, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This is an unhelpful and poor quality GA review. The reviewer has since been banned from Wikipedia. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 11:51, 14 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]