Jump to content

Talk:2015 Israeli legislative election/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing

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

Reviewer: Jfhutson (talk · contribs) 22:29, 7 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]


Failed "good article" nomination

[edit]

This article has failed its Good article nomination. This is how the article, as of December 7, 2015, compares against the six good article criteria:

1. Well written?:  Fail: disorganized, see below.
2. Verifiable?:  Fail: multiple citation errors, sources themselves look ok at first glance but cannot comment on foreign sites I'm not familiar with
3. Broad in coverage?:  Fail: empty polling section. Results section inadequate
4. Neutral point of view?: Not sure. Did not evaluate.
5. Stable?:  Pass
6. Images?: Not sure. Very few images. Fine if none are available. Distribute one from the lead to the body. Did not check licencing.

The article should be reorganized to make it easier to read. Take a look at some similar articles at WP:FA#Politics and government to see how such an article might be organized. The background section contains information about the election itself. Background should be information I need to know before you tell me about this election. The Electoral system section should be in the background section, rather than following it. The Date and Calendar sections should be reworked into a readable narrative of the events of and leading up to the election. Some of it should probably be in background, and some in a section which does not exist yet that actually describes the events of the election.

Summarize the opinion polls rather than just linking the main article. See WP:SS.

The results section needs more than one sentence and a table.

I have not reviewed every aspect of this article because it would need a lot of work get to GA quality.

When these issues are addressed, the article can be renominated. If you feel that this review is in error, feel free to have it reassessed. Thank you for your work so far.— JFH (talk) 22:29, 7 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]