Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Mary McLeod Bethune/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 • • GAN review not found
- Result: Delisted. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 10:28, 27 September 2024 (UTC)
This article contains a 5-paragraph bloated lede, numerous uncited sentences and paragraphs, and short, one sentence paragraphs in a very long "Legacy and honours" section. Z1720 (talk) 04:17, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
- I agree that this article has lots of deficiencies. -- Melchior2006 (talk) 07:27, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
- The article has seen a flurry of activity since this GAR was opened. Could you provide additional feedback following recent edits? ZsinjTalk 11:39, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
- I plan to keep working on this article to address the issues raised. Other editors are active and making improvements. I welcome further feedback, review, or support at the article. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 15:32, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Zsinj and Firefangledfeathers: Since reviewer time is limited, please post below when the article fulfils the GA criteria and someone will conduct a more in-depth review. Z1720 (talk) 17:08, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 17:11, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
- Hi Firefangledfeathers, we are around three weeks away from this GAR being three months old, which is normally when we start looking towards a close (we try not to let them go on indefinitely). There still seems to be extensive issues with the article. Do you believe that it is salvageable? ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 21:25, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
- Will update soon. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 02:10, 23 September 2024 (UTC)
- AirshipJungleman29 and Z1720. I don't have it in me to continue, and I don't think anyone else is taking this on. This is ready for closure. In addition to the issues Z1720 mentions above, there are many poor sources of the "over-simplified picture book for children" variety, despite the availability of many great books and journal articles. There's a gap in her biography of her work with women's clubs, with a commented out section ready to go if someone can improve the sourcing. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 02:41, 27 September 2024 (UTC)
- Nevertheless, I appreciate and thank you for your efforts. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 10:27, 27 September 2024 (UTC)
- AirshipJungleman29 and Z1720. I don't have it in me to continue, and I don't think anyone else is taking this on. This is ready for closure. In addition to the issues Z1720 mentions above, there are many poor sources of the "over-simplified picture book for children" variety, despite the availability of many great books and journal articles. There's a gap in her biography of her work with women's clubs, with a commented out section ready to go if someone can improve the sourcing. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 02:41, 27 September 2024 (UTC)
- Will update soon. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 02:10, 23 September 2024 (UTC)
- Hi Firefangledfeathers, we are around three weeks away from this GAR being three months old, which is normally when we start looking towards a close (we try not to let them go on indefinitely). There still seems to be extensive issues with the article. Do you believe that it is salvageable? ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 21:25, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
- @Zsinj and Firefangledfeathers: Since reviewer time is limited, please post below when the article fulfils the GA criteria and someone will conduct a more in-depth review. Z1720 (talk) 17:08, 15 July 2024 (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.