Talk:Dubh Artach/GA1

GA Reassessment
This discussion is transcluded from Talk:Dubh Artach/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the reassessment.

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, listed below. I will check back in seven days. If these issues are 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. This is a really nice article with which I only have two issues:


 * The sources used need to include the page number(s) of the books/journals being relied on for the information.


 * The lead is just a little too short to adequately summarise the article.

--Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 00:03, 7 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Hopefully all fixed. Ben   Mac  Dui  19:37, 8 September 2008 (UTC)


 * That's brilliant, thanks. Just one remaining question; there are a few citations to Stevenson (1872), which isn't included in the sources. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 19:50, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Scrub that, I see what's happened. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 19:53, 8 September 2008 (UTC)