Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Cody Rhodes/1

Cody Rhodes

 * • [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Good_article_reassessment/Cody_Rhodes/1&action=watch Watch article reassessment page] • Most recent review
 * Result: Though the issue of the tagging still needs to be resolved, this is not sufficient to disqualify the article from "good article" status. The article is already well cited, and the consensus of the comments below indicates that any remaining issues can be dealt with without delisting.StoryKai (talk) 15:01, 28 June 2019 (UTC) ​

Based on my comments at Talk:Cody Rhodes/GA2. THE NEW  Immortal  Wizard  (chat) 19:58, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment This has a few tags on it, but I am not sure if the article is really that bad. For example there is an orange tag asking for additional citations in the Professional Wrestling Career, but the section is pretty well cited. An expand section tag for a section that is only a few months old. Another expand section tag that is for a section that has subsections covering the extra years. I feel it has been tag bombed. There are some issues, but I don't think it is as bad as the tags suggest. AIRcorn (talk) 22:16, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
 * While I don't think the orange level tags are justified here they still need to be addressed. We can't have a good article siting around covered with them. They can be removed and replaced with more focused tags (or better yet removed when the issue is no longer present). Hopefully some of the wrestling focused editors here can address them. BTW my comment is not a keep or a delist at the moment, it was more an initial assessment of the tags. I haven't done a proper assessment of the article yet. AIRcorn (talk) 22:28, 31 March 2019 (UTC)


 * I agree with the assessment, a lot of the tagging was done by the same person who then turned around and nominated it for GAR. The same editor who had ANI problems and blocking, in part for behavior around GAN. In fact I thought there was an unblock condition of not doing GARs, but I could be wrong there. MPJ-DK (talk) 22:27, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
 * They are not topic banned it seems. An admin closed the post saying, we will see what happens when their block ended. Any more disruption needs to be reported to ANI immediately though. StaticVapor message me!   02:12, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Agreed. The The Brotherhood (2013–2015) section is basically unreferenced, but I don't think it's hard to source. The section on NJPW could do with being put into paragraphs (filmography needs citing too). Nothing that should really cause the article to be demoted. Best Wishes,  Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 22:28, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Agreed with above. If anyone has any major issues that is going to require delisting, hopefully someone would be able to work on it. Otherwise I don't see reason for delisting. StaticVapor message me!   02:12, 22 March 2019 (UTC)