Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Terry Pratchett/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: It has been pointed out that the sourcing and some aspects of the writing in this article are below GA standards, and with multiple citation needed tags and "more citations needed" banners in several sections, this is a clear Delist. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 03:14, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
Been a while since a GAR nom. I have some problems with this article.
- The works section has been tagged for additional citations needed for verification.
- there's two citation needed tags in styles and themes section.
- He has UK sales of more than 2.5 million copies a year.[34][better source needed]
- I also have a problem with broadness. For some reason, the section of his career is two paragraphs smaller than the paragraph on his alzheimer's disease. I feel as if there's undue weight there.
That's it. Would take some work to hopefully bring this back to status. Onegreatjoke (talk) 18:42, 24 February 2023 (UTC)
- I've resolved one tag and will try to help if anyone else is willing to take the lead on this. (I'm reluctant to delve too deep, as reading the sources is giving me spoilers for the Pratchett novels I haven't read yet :) Update: No responses, so I'll take this on and (sigh) face spoilers if need be. I don't think it's too bad. I've added a "Works cited" section that should have enough to resolve all the tags; will add inline cites. Olivaw-Daneel (talk) 17:39, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
- Update: As I look into this I'm finding more issues than just the ones identified above. There are fan sites – lspace, alt.fan.pratchett – self-published interview websites that look unreliable, a lot of primary sources and too many quotes from Pratchett. I'd started citing things to higher quality sources, but this requires a lot more attention than I'm finding the time for atm. And no one else has stepped in so far. No objections to delisting. Olivaw-Daneel (talk) 11:37, 8 March 2023 (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.