Talk:Automated teller machine/GA1

GA Sweeps
This article has been reviewed as part of WikiProject Good articles/Project quality task force in an effort to ensure all listed Good articles continue to meet the Good article criteria. In reviewing the article, I have found there are some issues that may need to be addressed.


 * There are two requests for citation, dated December 2007 and April 2008.


 * Large parts of this article are unreferenced. For instance, the entire Location section, all but the last sentence of Financial networks, and half of Related devices.


 * Ref #47 is blank.


 * There are four dead links, here.


 * What is being listed under Books? Should this be called Further reading, or were these sources used in writing the article? If the latter, then the section should be called Bibliography and the page number(s) used cited in the References section.


 * "This instance of the invention is credited to John Shepherd-Barron ...". What's an "instance of an invention"?


 * "On premise ATMs are typically more advanced ...". Shouldn't this be "on-premise ATMs"?


 * "ATMs have yet to reach high numbers in the Near East/Africa". As of when? 2008?


 * "Manufactures have demonstrated and have deployed several different technologies on ATMs ...". "Manufacturers"?


 * "If ATMs do go out of service, customers could be left without the ability to make transactions until the beginning of their bank's next time of opening hours." Reads very awkwardly.


 * "Of course, not all errors are to the detriment of customers". Why "of course"?


 * "While bank personnel are generally trained better at spotting and removing counterfeit cash ...". Trained better trained than what?


 * "The result of receiving too much money may be influenced on the card holder agreement in place between the customer and the bank." Reads very strangely. "Influenced by"?


 * These are not necessarily the only areas where I think the prose needs some work; I'd suggest it all needs to be looked over.

I will check back in no less than seven days. If progress is being made and issues are being addressed, the article will remain listed as a Good article. Otherwise, it may be delisted (such a decision may be challenged through WP:GAR). If improved after it has been delisted, it may be nominated at WP:GAN. Feel free to drop a message on my talk page if you have any questions, and many thanks for all the hard work that has gone into this article thus far. Regards, Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 18:54, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

As these issues remain unaddressed, this article has now been delisted. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 17:00, 3 August 2008 (UTC)