Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Shakira/1

Shakira

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch article reassessment page • GAN review not found

Result: The article was delisted in 2006. If the nominator believes it now satisfies the Good Article criteria it should be renominated at WP:GAN AIRcorn (talk) 13:29, 10 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I believe that this page (Shakira) should be reassessed and re-listed as a Good Article. This article was listed as a "Good Article" once but it was delisted. However, I do not find the reason why it was delisted as it satisfies all the criteria--Andreasyeah (talk) 19:39, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Strong oppose "I believe that Shakira page is a GA, because I see no problems". The main problem is that you never tried to contact main editors, even when I said it to you twice. Now returning to the article:
1 ^{[citation needed]} tag
1 ^[when?] tag
1 {{prose}} tag
5 {{dead link}} tags
Poorly written references. I'm not going to prose, but if those problems are highly vissible, prose is worst than that. Tbhotch* ^{۩ ۞} 19:48, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

OK I will do try to contact the main editors and improve the article. After that I will ask again for reassessment--Andreasyeah (talk) 20:26, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

When you feel that you have got the artcile into shape then simply re-niomate at WP:GAN. WP:GAR is primarily concerned with re-assessing what may be perceived to be recent faulty reviews. Jezhotwells (talk) 01:24, 10 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please read WP:DEADREF before dealing with the dead link tags; it was substantially revised earlier this year. Dead links are not actually prohibited by the GA criteria. WhatamIdoing (talk) 15:55, 24 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Looking at the article milestones on the talk page it appears that this was promoted and then delisted in 2006. As over four years have passed it would be better to take this through the standard nominations procedure. AIRcorn (talk) 02:43, 30 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]