Talk:Yuri Knorozov/GA1

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

A number of editors indicated reservations about the complete lack of inline citations after this article was first promoted in 2006. The cirriteria are enforced more nowadays, and as this article completely fails 2 b), i think it should be delisted. (btw, the explanatory notes in the reference section are not citations). Ah, i see that a few ARE citations, but they don't give page numbers, and are still not enough, the and the article was fact tagged, showing that come of the points are challenged.Yobmod (talk) 10:27, 16 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Hmm. "A number of editors"? I don't see any post-GA comments of this nature. As for the (solitary) {fact} tag, I recall that I added it myself, a minor statement that I don't really doubt but at the time hadn't come across a specific ref for.
 * Still, I spose it could use a little cleanup, but it will take me a week, more likely two or thereabouts. Request sufficient time to be able to complete. --cjllw ʘ  TALK 00:28, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

As these issues were not addressed I am closing this review as delist. --Malleus Fatuorum 22:38, 18 February 2009 (UTC)