Talk:FreeBSD/GA2

GA Reassessment
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the reassessment.''

This article most notably fails section 1(b) by having numerous short sections and long lists, and is weak on 2(c) with 59 out of 143 citations self-sourced. I believe we should remove the version history section as being redundant with the separate article as another editor has already suggested, and improve content/sourcing as needed. I have worked on the OpenBSD article including leading a WP:FAR, and want to get a common consensus for how BSD articles should look. Tonystewart14 (talk) 01:21, 9 April 2020 (UTC)
 * I agree, the article needs some improvement. Fixing 1b should be straightforward. 2c Can be improved by changing version history table. I don't think it should be fully removed, but maybe simplified to only contain the major releases and significant changes between them:
 * {| class="wikitable"

! version !! major version release date !! changes
 * + Version history
 * 1.x || release date || everything what happened between 1.0 and 2.0
 * 2.x || release date || everything what happened between 2.0 and 3.0
 * }
 * With link to article with full version history, it shouldn't be confusing and seems to be consistent with WP:NOTCHANGELOG. I also believe that the article goes into too much detail while describing some features, like in FreeBSD. It gives it unnecessary attention. The subsection in question has more content than the main article about the subject. – K4rolB (talk) 09:42, 11 April 2020 (UTC)
 * }
 * With link to article with full version history, it shouldn't be confusing and seems to be consistent with WP:NOTCHANGELOG. I also believe that the article goes into too much detail while describing some features, like in FreeBSD. It gives it unnecessary attention. The subsection in question has more content than the main article about the subject. – K4rolB (talk) 09:42, 11 April 2020 (UTC)