Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Doctor Who (2008–2010 specials)/1
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
- Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • • Most recent review
- Result: No concerns raised. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 13:09, 8 January 2024 (UTC)
Various maintens tags have been placed dating back to May 2020. I plan on fixing them myself but I wanted to see if anyother issues had arrised since then. Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 07:46, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
- @OlifanofmrTennant An entire reassessment based solely on two maintenance tags is both troubling and concerning. If they are fixed, which you've noted you could do yourself, do you intend to close this reassessment? Why could this not have simply been a discussion on the specials' relevant talk page? -- Alex_21 TALK 05:03, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
- Because the templates have been there since 2020 and 2021 and there has been 189 revisions in the five years since it reached GA adding an additonal 11,534 bytes to the page so I think its fairly likely that an additional problem would be noticed. Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 15:59, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
- That doesn't explain the need for a reassessment instead of just a regular talk page discussion. Are there actually any other issues? -- Alex_21 TALK 01:36, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
- @OlifanofmrTennant Given that the two {{citation needed}} templates have been repaired, do you intend to now close this reassessment, given the lack of any other issues you've raised? -- Alex_21 TALK 02:30, 4 January 2024 (UTC)
- @OlifanofmrTennant You seem to have forgotten about this. Any further updates? -- Alex_21 TALK 01:14, 8 January 2024 (UTC)
- I am waiting for a review Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 05:43, 8 January 2024 (UTC)
- @OlifanofmrTennant Do you agree that there is no longer a need for this reassessment? On what grounds of WP:GAR was it opened? Which of the six good article criteria do you believe this article no longer follows? -- Alex_21 TALK 05:56, 8 January 2024 (UTC)
- I am waiting for a review Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 05:43, 8 January 2024 (UTC)
- @OlifanofmrTennant You seem to have forgotten about this. Any further updates? -- Alex_21 TALK 01:14, 8 January 2024 (UTC)
- Because the templates have been there since 2020 and 2021 and there has been 189 revisions in the five years since it reached GA adding an additonal 11,534 bytes to the page so I think its fairly likely that an additional problem would be noticed. Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 15:59, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.