Talk:1844 United States presidential election/GA2
GA Review[edit]
| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Adam Cuerden (talk · contribs) 18:06, 22 April 2014 (UTC) Failed Per my previous comments, this introduces large numbers of unexplained 19th-century movements and events, which are not put into context, and needs massive amounts of copyediting to clarify it sufficiently. The comments of the last review were never completely addressed, let alone the rest of the article. I was willing to hand this off to someone else, but it's clear the nominator is unwilling to put the work in that this article needs before it can pass GA. Fails good article criterion 1, Well-written.
This would make an excellent sixth chapter of a box on the period, but Wikipedia articles need some degree of ability to stand alone. This is not a topic that is impossible to present to a general audience, if WP:Summary style was used appropriately. It's clearly written by someone who has done the research, but will need a huge amount of shepherding to get it up to GA level. Adam Cuerden (talk) 18:09, 22 April 2014 (UTC) Adam Cuerden (talk) 18:06, 22 April 2014 (UTC)