Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Fortress of Klis/1

Fortress of Klis

 * • [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Good_article_reassessment/Fortress_of_Klis/1&action=watch Watch article reassessment page] • Most recent review
 * Result: Delisted. &#126;~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 12:11, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

Significant amount of the article, including almost the entire "Importance" section is uncited. Z1720 (talk) 01:59, 23 March 2024 (UTC)


 * @Z1720 it looks like most of this "Importance" section is uncited because it was in the lead section, as it had been added in edits like or  decades ago, but was then broken out in this unexplained edit in 2013, by an account that was later indefinitely blocked for other abuse (I found this using the "Who Wrote That?" extension). Maybe the logic of that needs to be reassessed first. --Joy (talk) 15:09, 23 March 2024 (UTC)


 * Comment. I've re-integrated the old lede into the lede and edited it mildly for concision.  The nomination does not appear to be correct that a "significant amount of the article is uncited" - can you clarify where exactly these uncited parts are, if you're standing by that?
 * While I'm not sure if it's GAR-worthy, the prose is not particularly tight, and it seems to have some Croatian nationalist vibes in parts (which I'm sure is in the sources, but it doesn't mean that has to be transmitted here - I removed a "Turkish menace" for example). I'd argue that would be a more productive area to examine and spruce up in this.  SnowFire (talk) 06:21, 24 March 2024 (UTC)
 * One thing I noticed as well was the quality of the supporting materials - I swapped out the top image immediately. The laundry list of historical years in the infobox also doesn't strike me as well documented or a good use of screen-estate. --Joy (talk) 10:46, 24 March 2024 (UTC)
 * I noticed now that @Edgars2007 noticed this in 2015 (!). I've moved it around a bit, is this better? --Joy (talk) 12:35, 24 March 2024 (UTC)


 * Thanks to SnowFire's recent edit, I had a look at one of the main sources, the municipality's history page:
 * This archive link implies that the text was taken from a 1998 book called Klis: prošlost, toponimi, govor published by an NGO called Croatian society Trpimir Klis. It would be better to get this referenced to the actual work, which seems to be ISBN 953-96751-3-8, with page numbers.
 * At the same time, the current website's history link goes to this:
 * --Joy (talk) 08:39, 26 March 2024 (UTC)
 * --Joy (talk) 08:39, 26 March 2024 (UTC)
 * --Joy (talk) 08:39, 26 March 2024 (UTC)


 * I would request that this GAR not be closed too aggressively - I do think that this article could use a tune-up, even if not for the reasons the nominator cited, but it will probably take more time. SnowFire (talk) 21:35, 30 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Comment. I haven't had the time to come back to this like I'd hoped.  I think this article has the bones of being in great shape and only needs some minor work to get back to GA quality - just some rereading of the sources and rephrasing, mostly. , would you have time to take a go at this?  If not, I suppose I'd be fine with a reluctant delist-by-default.  SnowFire (talk) 20:31, 15 April 2024 (UTC)