Talk:Gunston Hall/GA1

GA Reassessment

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

This article is being reviewed as part of the WikiProject Good Articles. We're doing Sweeps to go over all of the current GAs and see if they still meet the GA criteria. This article was awarded GA-status back in 2007, so I will be assessing the article to ensure that it is still compliant.Pyrotec (talk) 19:42, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

Overall summary

The main problem with this article is lack of WP:verification. There are in-line citations, but these are reliant on references that invoke web pages. The following links are broken;

• Ref 4.
• Ref 5.
• Ref 7.
• Ref 8.
• Ref 9.
• Ref 11.
• Ref 16.
• Ref 17.
• Ref 18.
• ref 19.
• Ref 20.
• Ref 23.
• Ref 25.
• Ref 26.
• Ref 27.
• Ref 28.
• Ref 29.
• Ref 30.
• Ref 31.
• Ref 32.

In addition:

• Ref 35 does not appear to provide verification of what is claimed.
• There is a {citation needed} flag for the statement: "as well as the mascot for George Mason University, Gunston."

Pyrotec (talk) 21:33 21 September 2009

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

---

A interesting article.

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose quality:

   B. MoS compliance:

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. References to sources:

   B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

   Much of the sourcing comes from web links and a significant proportion are now broken links.

   C. No original research:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   B. Focused:

4. Is it neutral?

   Fair representation without bias:

5. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

   A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

   B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

   Due to lack of WP:Verify.

I'm revoking GA-status from this article. The article can of course be resubmitted to WP:GAN at anytime, hopefully after the links have been repaired. Pyrotec (talk) 10:51, 28 September 2009 (UTC)