Talk:Television in Australia/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.
 * GA review (see here for criteria)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS):
 * The lead section is too short for an article this size.
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * Long sections, such as "Programming", "News and current affairs" and "Ratings" are almost entirely unreferenced. While the history section has a good number of references, it relies heavily on one source, which does not appear particularly reliable.
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars etc.:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * Lampman (talk) 11:49, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Since no significant improvements have been made to the article over the last week, I will now delist it. Lampman (talk) 13:44, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * Lampman (talk) 11:49, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Since no significant improvements have been made to the article over the last week, I will now delist it. Lampman (talk) 13:44, 18 June 2009 (UTC)