Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Planetes/1
- Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch •
- Result: Delist. bibliomaniac15 23:11, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
This article appears to have passed GA in 2006, but that version did not meet the GA criteria, nor does this one. It is not well-written, is badly formatting and does not follow the Anime/Manga MOS, is not well sourced and appears to contain a lot of OR , and it has an excessive amount of non-free images added for decoration purposes. At best, it is a B quality article, but it needs more work to be a GA and I feel it should be delisted because of this. AnmaFinotera (talk) 23:05, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
- Delist. The article is poorly written and under-referenced. There are also MoS issues; for example, the lead should be better-developed. Majoreditor (talk) 04:50, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
- Delist Needs a massive cleanup on formatting, and additional reliable sources. The images are in bad shape too; some of them don't have fair-use rationales, and it's not like we need four separate character images.--十八 10:47, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
- Delist: Agreed -- poorly written, underreferenced, badly organized. I took a poke at it a couple weeks ago when I added it to my TBD list of things to clean up, but didn't think to bring it up for a reassessment. —Quasirandom (talk) 14:55, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
- On the plus side, the character descriptions really are that, and not plot summaries of what each one did. —Quasirandom (talk) 03:38, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
- Delist. The lead is poor, and the plot section is not really a plot section: it contains critical analysis (e.g. `...more often the concept of collecting "trash" in space is merely a storytelling method for building character development.') which needs to be sourced. In general the information in the article is based too much on primary sources. Geometry guy 19:15, 11 February 2008 (UTC)