Talk:Our Lady of Europe/GA1

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

Reviewer: ✽ Juniper§ Liege   (TALK)  00:05, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

I shall be undertaking the review of this article against the Good Article criteria, per its nomination for Good Article status. ✽ Juniper§ Liege  (TALK)  00:10, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Quick fail criteria assessment

 * 1) The article completely lacks reliable sources – see Wikipedia:Verifiability.
 * 2) The topic is treated in an obviously non-neutral way – see Wikipedia:Neutral point of view.
 * 3) There are cleanup banners that are obviously still valid, including cleanup, wikify, NPOV, unreferenced or large numbers of fact, clarifyme, or similar tags.
 * 4) The article is or has been the subject of ongoing or recent, unresolved edit wars.
 * 5) The article specifically concerns a rapidly unfolding current event with a definite endpoint.
 * 1) The article is or has been the subject of ongoing or recent, unresolved edit wars.
 * 2) The article specifically concerns a rapidly unfolding current event with a definite endpoint.
 * 1) The article specifically concerns a rapidly unfolding current event with a definite endpoint.
 * 1) The article specifically concerns a rapidly unfolding current event with a definite endpoint.

The article passes the quick-fail criteria list. The main review will follow. ✽ Juniper§ Liege  (TALK)  00:15, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Preliminary issues

 * References 1 and 2 are dead links (and have actually been marked so). Technically, this is grounds for a quick-fail, but I am willing to give editors a bit of time to fix this problem. However, given that the 2 sources are cited a total of 6 times, if these references cannot be fixed (or the material removed) the article will have to be failed. ✽ Juniper§ Liege   (TALK)  00:18, 1 April 2010 (UTC)


 * The article is over-linked. I will go through and remove some of the more unnecessary wikilinks, but editors of this article should themselves consult WP:OVERLINK and make changes accordingly. ✽ Juniper§ Liege   (TALK)  00:19, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I have removed some of the more obvious unnecessary wikilinks. In general, you should not link common geographical places (like London, Madrid) except when of specific interest to the article material. Also, names/places (nouns) should only be linked once - if they are repeated again in the article they should not be linked. Common words like altar, silk, mass, etc., do not need to be wikilinked. Similarly, Spanish language does not need to be linked (unless you are specifically talking about the Spanish language) which was not the case here; nor should abstract dates be wikilinked (15 May for example) or 15 century.


 * The lead is also too short and should be expanded to reflect the contents of the article.

I will not undertake the main review of the article until the above issues are addressed, as the first and third points are cause for immediate failure. If there are any questions, please contact me. ✽ Juniper§ Liege  (TALK)  00:21, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
 * No progress since the above was noted, so it might as well be failed now. Wizardman  Operation Big Bear 04:51, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
 * There hasn't been any progress on the points mentioned above. Since the reviewer has been inactive for a bit, I'm going to fail this article. When the above concerns are fixed, it can be renominated at GAN. Wizardman  Operation Big Bear 05:35, 16 April 2010 (UTC)