Talk:Ninth European Parliament/GA1
GA Review
[edit]| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Fiamh (talk · contribs) 01:49, 29 October 2019 (UTC)
Failed "good article" nomination
[edit]This article has failed its Good article nomination. This is how the article, as of October 29, 2019, compares against the six good article criteria:
- 1. Well written?: There are some issues with MOS. The lede does not adequately summarize article contents. In addition, long tables harm readability. Consider reducing, collapsing or moving some to separate lists with prose summaries here.
- 2. Verifiable?: Sourcing is seriously lacking. Some entire sections have no sourcing. I have flagged some sentences that need a citation.
- 3. Broad in coverage?: Not evaluated
- 4. Neutral point of view?: Not evaluated
- 5. Stable?: It is not possible for this article to meet the stability criterion, because it is about an ongoing event. As votes are done, new actions taken, etc. the article will need to change as a result.
- 6. Images?: Not evaluated
When these issues are addressed, the article can be renominated. If you feel that this review is in error, feel free to have it reassessed. Thank you for your work so far.— Fiamh (talk, contribs) 01:49, 29 October 2019 (UTC)