Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mythology/Assessment

I don't know where to archive finished assessment requests so this seems the most likely place. The following assessment requests were moved from the assessment page because they are finished:

Morgawr (cryptid)

This article now has extra material and a picture since it was last rated. Any chance of an upgrade to "start"? Totnesmartin 16:40, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Upgraded assessment to start. Goldenrowley 23:58, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Troilus

This article is unrated and has been greatly expanded using many references. --Peter cohen 00:27, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It is now assessed. Goldenrowley 00:01, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I'm repeating here the request on your user page asking for what to do to hike it up another grade. Maybe seeing your answer in a more public place will help guide other ew editors too. BTW, I'm not actually sure whether the next level is A grade or Good Article level, which I gather is assessed centrally. Thanks, again.--Peter cohen 12:48, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On the article talk page, see the "comment" link after the assessment.Goldenrowley 02:21, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again. I've enlarged the pictures as suggested and am going through the whole article again being absolutely certain about the referencing (Unfortunately I've lost track, for example, of what source said Deithynos was probably meant to be Deiphobus, so I have removed mention of that) and spotting more of the typos. I'm still musing on what a list might help with. I'll nominate it for good article assessment by the end of the month. --Peter cohen 08:35, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This article has now reached GA. So we now have nineteen articles at GA or above. I had wanted to ceremonially up the count in the table on the page, but can't see how to do it and the count remains at 11, not the 12 it should be.

Presumably I should put the article up for reassessment here and try for A class before going for FA? I think her and various literary projects will be more useful for comment on contents than peer review will be. In the mean time, the GA reviewer has left me with a few suggestions to consider for now.--Peter cohen 23:14, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]