Talk:Nature (journal)/GA1

GA Reassessment
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.

There seems to be relatively less references than expected. In addition, some of them are self-referenced and poorly formatted. OhanaUnitedTalk page 05:14, 9 May 2009 (UTC)


 * I take the liberty to delist this article as a GA; as a month has passed and no significant work has been done. I agree with the above assessment. The history section is the only part that is well referenced, but this is based almost entirely on a single source, and cannot therefore be considered balanced. Lampman (talk) 14:10, 8 June 2009 (UTC)