Talk:Seven Network/GA1

GA Reassessment

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

This page surely no longer falls under the criteria of "good article" status. It appears to now be poorly written with bad spelling, grammar and punctuation. In my opinion it fails to provide a neutral document of the topic.

Formatting of text is inconsistent with the use of italics, bold and quoted text.

It also appears to have been hijacked by fanbois of both the Seven Network (who seem intent on blogging every insignficant change, milestone or achievement) and its chief rival the Nine Network (boasting Nine's supposed ratings 'resurgence' and the supposed frailty of Seven's dominance).

e.g.

"The Bounce was pulled from the air after just five episodes. It is said that the show has been put into production hiatus. The show was replaced by reruns of British comedy, The Vicar of Dibley. It was said that the show would return for the final series in September 2010."

"Seven has been strong in the ratings since 2007, but was hit fairly hard in 2010 when the Nine Network introduced a new lineup of programs, including the return of Light Entertainment program Hey Hey It's Saturday, and general entertainment programs like Top Gear Australia which rated extremely well in the 2010 period, the success of Millionaire Hot Seat, the premiere of Underbelly, and regrowth of Nine News and ACA. Nine won 17 weeks in 2010, their greatest success since 2006. At one stage, the Nine Network almost threatened to overtake the Seven Network as No.1 in 2010."

"However since Ian Ross's retirement from Seven News, Nine News has had a high surge in viewers, and Seven News have had a slight drop by around 100,000 - 200,000, The fall of ratings on Seven News can be partly explained by the lead-in game show program, Deal or No Deal, which saw its audience decline from a high of just under one million at its peak to about 500,000 on 1 November 2010." Andjb (talk) 08:27, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

How is the re-assessment going? AIRcorn (talk) 15:47, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I removed all the uncited information at one point. Not certain the article is comprehensive. :( --LauraHale (talk) 21:24, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The prose is quite bad in places too (single sentence paragraphs, seas of blue, news-ticker style presentation of facts, etc). Since the reassessment appears to be abandoned I will close it as delist. AIRcorn (talk) 09:07, 22 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Seven years on and the problems remain. This Good Article has been well and truly Wikipediaed by the dumbass anons.124.169.101.39 (talk) 18:11, 29 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]