Talk:Julia Gillard/GA1

GA Review

Reviewer: Inkheart0123 (talk) 12:22, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

Regarding the GA nomination just put up, the fact that the page isn't up to standard is beside the point. IMHO I don't think it's worth the time and energy to attempt to make a GA article on a subject that is constantly prone to change, and subsequent article edits. GAs/FAs tend to be better for historical things that tend to be constant and don't change. My 2c. Timeshift (talk) 14:17, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

I think it is beside the point that the page is constantly changing it is a good article and follows the criteria very well. It should be accepted as a Good Article. - unsigned.

The issue is that every week the article will be disputed as still being GA material. Timeshift (talk) 05:53, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

I'm really surprised to see that this article was assessed as a GA. It doesn't quote either of the two(?) professionally published biographies of Gillard or draw on the academic articles relevant to her career. As a result, it provides a pretty patchy overview of her. Nick-D (talk) 11:05, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

Something funny is going on here. The reviewer and the passer have no other edits apart from to the article or review. I have asked for an explanation at Timeshift9's talk page regarded some other curious edits and am waiting for a reply. I am going to be bold and delist this for now until a proper review is conducted. AIRcorn (talk) 11:13, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

For the record, I am not guilty of anything and was mis-accused, per the response on my talk page. Timeshift (talk) 15:02, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

It is actually very unusual and suspisious. Upon further review i have realised that this article does not meet the good article criteria as it is very basic and not detailed. I think it should be denied as a good article despite my nomination. --Editor2205 (talk) 00:33, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Just want to re-clarify in case there is any doubt that Timeshift is innocent of any wrongdoing. As the nominator you can withdraw the nomination at any time. AIRcorn (talk) 00:56, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Could a user please indicate how the nominator (me: Editor2205) can withdraw the article from the nomination. --Editor2205 (talk) 04:13, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Article has been withdrawn by the nominator AIRcorn (talk) 10:09, 24 August 2011 (UTC)