Talk:Klaus Thielmann/GA1: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
History6042 (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
History6042 (talk | contribs) close Klaus Thielmann good article nomination as unsuccessful (GANReviewTool) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
==GA Review== |
==GA Review== |
||
{{atopr |
|||
| status = |
|||
| result = Unsuccessful. [[User:History6042|<span style="color:darkorange">History6042😊</span>]] '''([[User talk:History6042|<span style="color:blue">Contact me</span>]])''' 03:17, 2 January 2025 (UTC) |
|||
}} |
|||
{{Good article tools}} |
{{Good article tools}} |
||
<noinclude>{{al|{{#titleparts:Klaus Thielmann/GA1|-1}}|noname=yes}}<br/></noinclude><includeonly>:''This review is [[WP:transclusion|transcluded]] from [[Talk:Klaus Thielmann/GA1]]. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''</includeonly> |
<noinclude>{{al|{{#titleparts:Klaus Thielmann/GA1|-1}}|noname=yes}}<br/></noinclude><includeonly>:''This review is [[WP:transclusion|transcluded]] from [[Talk:Klaus Thielmann/GA1]]. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''</includeonly> |
||
| Line 67: | Line 71: | ||
::Because of the fact that the 1st citation is already used incorrectly twice I am going to have to fail this. [[User:History6042|<span style="color:darkorange">History6042😊</span>]] '''([[User talk:History6042|<span style="color:blue">Contact me</span>]])''' 03:15, 2 January 2025 (UTC) |
::Because of the fact that the 1st citation is already used incorrectly twice I am going to have to fail this. [[User:History6042|<span style="color:darkorange">History6042😊</span>]] '''([[User talk:History6042|<span style="color:blue">Contact me</span>]])''' 03:15, 2 January 2025 (UTC) |
||
:::If you wish to renominate this and have it succeed I would suggest going through the references and making sure that they all say what they should. [[User:History6042|<span style="color:darkorange">History6042😊</span>]] '''([[User talk:History6042|<span style="color:blue">Contact me</span>]])''' 03:15, 2 January 2025 (UTC) |
:::If you wish to renominate this and have it succeed I would suggest going through the references and making sure that they all say what they should. [[User:History6042|<span style="color:darkorange">History6042😊</span>]] '''([[User talk:History6042|<span style="color:blue">Contact me</span>]])''' 03:15, 2 January 2025 (UTC) |
||
{{abot}} |
|||
Revision as of 03:17, 2 January 2025
GA Review
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.
| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Nominator: Maxwhollymoralground (talk · contribs) 14:07, 17 November 2024 (UTC)
Reviewer: History6042 (talk · contribs) 22:52, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
Hi, I'll be reviewing this article, good luck. History6042😊 (Contact me) 22:52, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
List
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
- Is it well written?
- A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
- B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
- A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
- Is it verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check?
- A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:
- B. Reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose):
- C. It contains no original research:
- D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:
- A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:
- Is it broad in its coverage?
- A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:
- B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
- A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:
- Is it neutral?
- It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
- It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
- Is it stable?
- It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
- It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
- Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
- A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:
- B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
- A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:
- Overall:
- Pass or Fail:
- Pass or Fail:
Discussion
The only image in the article is captioned. History6042😊 (Contact me) 22:53, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- It is also relevant so it passes 6b. History6042😊 (Contact me) 22:53, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- It also has a useable copyright so it passes 6a as well. History6042😊 (Contact me) 22:55, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- This article has never been edit warred on so it is stable and passes criteria five. History6042😊 (Contact me) 22:57, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- For it being neutral the only issue I could find was it saying notable but I removed that. History6042😊 (Contact me) 23:00, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- It therefore passes 4. History6042😊 (Contact me) 23:00, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- I see no issues with too much detail. History6042😊 (Contact me) 23:08, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- For the prose I don't understand what "Thielmann additionally deployed 2,000 National People's Army members in the health sector in all Bezirke from December 1989." means. Is there a better why to write this? History6042😊 (Contact me) 23:11, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- Never mind I found a way to rewrite it. History6042😊 (Contact me) 02:56, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- I made a few more edits to the prose for grammar and now that's all good. History6042😊 (Contact me) 03:00, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- The article seems to cover all major details. History6042😊 (Contact me) 03:03, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- Earwig found nothing wrong. History6042😊 (Contact me) 03:04, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
Spotcheck
Time for a source spotcheck. History6042😊 (Contact me) 03:04, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- Citaion 1 is wrong, it says nothing about Quoos or Sorbian High School. History6042😊 (Contact me) 03:10, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- Because of the fact that the 1st citation is already used incorrectly twice I am going to have to fail this. History6042😊 (Contact me) 03:15, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- If you wish to renominate this and have it succeed I would suggest going through the references and making sure that they all say what they should. History6042😊 (Contact me) 03:15, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- Because of the fact that the 1st citation is already used incorrectly twice I am going to have to fail this. History6042😊 (Contact me) 03:15, 2 January 2025 (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.