Wikipedia:Articles for improvement/Nominations/Archives/2023/6

HDR10
✅ SVcode ( Talk ) 21:23, 31 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Because it is the most widespread of the HDR formats, and the article is Start-rated, it definitely should be an AFI. --RekishiEJ (talk) 17:17, 25 October 2022 (UTC)
 * 1) Support, has enough hits and needs more expansion. SVcode ( Talk ) 23:45, 27 October 2022 (UTC)
 * 2) Support - The project could really improve this article. Definitely.BabbaQ (talk) 22:53, 25 May 2023 (UTC)
 * 3) Support per above. The person who loves reading (talk) 02:53, 31 May 2023 (UTC)

National Civil Defence Cadet Corps

 * Article may be written like an advertisement, with almost all the content being unsourced. So far, I have deleted some unsourced content, and added some citation needed markers. I also pointed out that it may have unrelated stuff to the topic.  Brachy 08  (Talk)  (Contribs)  10:04, 25 May 2023 (UTC)


 * 1) Oppose: This article is not vital and has almost no viewership. This is a least concern item. Iskandar323 (talk) 10:46, 25 May 2023 (UTC)
 * 2) Oppose, per above. SVcode ( Talk ) 22:45, 25 May 2023 (UTC)
 * 3) Oppose per above. The person who loves reading (talk) 02:50, 31 May 2023 (UTC)

SVcode ( Talk ) 21:28, 31 May 2023 (UTC)

Charles III
SVcode ( Talk ) 19:32, 22 June 2023 (UTC)
 * A 'vital' article, which recently had a huge viewership back in September, peaking at 2,859,085(!) daily hits. It'll highly predictably get another massive spike this May.  And yet it languishes as a poorly structured mess with little apparent urgency to improve it.   109.255.211.6 (talk) 17:04, 25 March 2023 (UTC)
 * 1) Oppose, can improve but seems in a good shape. SVcode ( Talk ) 23:33, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
 * 2) Oppose already a good article. The person who loves reading (talk) 02:52, 31 May 2023 (UTC)
 * 3) Oppose it's a GA now. BorgQueen (talk) 18:16, 10 June 2023 (UTC)
 * 4) Comment - I and 109 agreed to go here, to GOCE, and to PR in March. Since then, the article improved very quickly, and hit GA two months later. So, to those looking at the nomination now and in the future, rest assured that the article was in a much worse state in March than it is now. Tim O&#39;Doherty (talk) 18:31, 10 June 2023 (UTC)