Talk:1985 Rajneeshee assassination plot/GA1


 * See also Talk:1985 Rajneeshee assassination plot from 07:19, 7 January 2008.

GA review: On Hold
I have reviewed this article according to the requirements of the GA criteria and have placed the article on hold until the following issues are addressed. As you address each issue, either strike through the statement/place a check mark next to the issue and state how you addressed it.
 * 1) Charles H. Turner should be wikilinked in the intro and should also be wikilinked in the first instance in the actual article.
 * 2) "Convictions and guilty pleas" section should probably just be named to "Convictions" unless you can include the pleas for each of the members of the plot. Right now there is only one person that says they pleaded guilty.
 * 3) Go through the inline citations and add an "access date" (if they don't already have it) that is current. This will make sure that all of the links are currently up to date. (For example, fix them to be like references #6 and #9.)

These should be very easy to fix and shouldn't take too long. I have left the article on hold for seven days for the issues to be addressed. If they are fixed in this time, I will pass the article. If not, the article will be failed and can be renominated at WP:GAN. If you have any questions or when you are done, let me know on my talk page and I'll get back to you as soon as I can. Happy editing! --Nehrams2020 (talk) 23:28, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Response to GA Review
 * ✅, wikilinked Charles H. Turner as Charles H. Turner (attorney), because there already exists Charles H. Turner, different person. Cirt (talk) 01:53, 7 January 2008 (UTC).
 * ✅, per GA Review suggestion. Cirt (talk) 01:53, 7 January 2008 (UTC).
 * ✅, Added "accessdate" where needed, as suggested above. Cirt (talk) 02:09, 7 January 2008 (UTC).

GA passed
Good job on addressing the above issues so quickly. I have passed this article according to the requirements of the GA criteria. Continue to improve the article, making sure that all new information is properly sourced. Also, to anyone that is reading this review, please consider reviewing an article or two at WP:GAN to help with the large backlog. Instructions can be found here. Each new reviewer that helps to review articles will help to reduce the time that articles wait to be reviewed. Keep up the good work, and I hope that you continue to bring articles up to Good Article status. If anyone disagrees with this review, an alternate opinion can be sought at Good article reassessment. If you have any further questions about this review, let me know on my talk page and I'll get back to you as soon as I can. I have updated the article history to reflect this review. Happy editing! --Nehrams2020 (talk) 07:19, 7 January 2008 (UTC)