Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Ralph Nader/1

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch article reassessment page

Result: delisted per consensus PeterSymonds | talk 21:17, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delist.

1. Prose- Fail. Fails Wikipedia:Embedded list. Links to copyrighted material. Includes Wikipedia:Words to avoid. Layout is poor, with several stub sections. Mechanics errors.

2. Verifiable- Fail, contains whole paragraphs and sections without sources. Contains info box with info that isn't true.

3. Coverage- Fail. Has several stub sections that can use more detail. Section concerning early life and 2000 election are too short.

4. Neutral- Fail. Several instances of biased wording. See "Clash with the automobile industry"

5. Stable- Fail. Current controversial candidate. Several lengthy exchanges on talk page.

6. Images- Fail. Contains copyrighted image, Sesame Street image that should be deleted.User:calbear22 (talk) 06:51, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delist. Let me count the reasons: Nice Shakespearian touch :-) Geometry guy 21:56, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The article fails criteria 1 due to stubby sections, minor issues with the lead, MoS concerns and use of lists rather than prose for key sections. There may be other issues I haven't yet noticed.
Criteria 3 runs into problems as coverage isn't particularly broad in key areas dealing with consumer safety and corporate response, and in political involvement. and unless I missed it, the article doesn't discuss his views on the Near East.
The article is far from neutral. Nader is a controversial individual. He's respected among consumer advocates and populists but assailed by free marketers, chambers of commerce, political conservatives and legal reformers. I see scant material discussing his reception among business and conservative interests.
Use of the Sesame Street image is problematic. Discussion of the episode should be in the body of the article rather than relegated to the photo caption.

The article requires substantial improvement before it meets GA standards. Majoreditor (talk) 18:10, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delist. I agree with the above concerns. Additionally, unlike several other presidential candidates, I think there is a case for delisting due to instability here. This article should not be unstable, as Ralph Nader's notability stretches back far beyond the current election; unfortunately, current election events seem to be impinging on this natural stability anyway. Geometry guy 21:56, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]