Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/German Shepherd Dog/1

German Shepherd Dog

 * • [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Good_article_reassessment/German_Shepherd_Dog/1&action=watch Watch article reassessment page] • Most recent review
 * Result: delisted Concerns about sourcing have been expressed, there are a number of unaddressed citation needed tags, also some dubious sources. Ongoing vandalism from IPs continues, the lead does not fully summarize the article. No progress is being made so I am delisting. Jezhotwells (talk) 04:26, 13 January 2012 (UTC).


 * The "in popular culture" section needs more sources. It was drive-by tagged as trivia, but it looks all right to me.
 * What makes this a reliable source?
 * I see a handful of [citation needed]s.
 * One source was a personal blog on Blogspot, which I removed.

Overall, the article has been maintained okay for a 2008 GA, but it still needs work. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 19:10, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Please notify the most recent GA reviewer. Also, please notify major contributing editors (identifiable through article stats script) and relevant WikiProjects for the article. Jezhotwells (talk) 18:31, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Notified WP:DOGS and Jpgordon. The reviewer is retired so I didn't bother with him. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 20:37, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
 * It would be nice to have a few more eyes than just me -- mostly I've been vandal fighting, and verifying some longevity data. I did fix one of the citations already. --jpgordon:==( o ) 01:03, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

Comment. Some of the citations reference dodgy sources, such as "Breed Data Summary" and "The Ultimate Service Dog". Certainly there's reliable sources which can be used in place of these dubious web sites. The "Popular Culture" section reads like a stack of Trivial Pursuit cards and will need refactoring. The lead is well-writtent but needs to provide a better description of the dog. There are places where the prose could be touched up and citation tags replaced with refs. Unless these issues are addressed the article should be delisted. Majoreditor (talk) 22:28, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

Delist - Agree with the comments by Majoreditor, and nothing has been done to the article since his post. Multiple dead links (see here), unreliable sources (those mentioned by Majoreditor, plus Pedigree Database, German Culture, etc), and a citation needed tag. Lead needs expansion. Dana boomer (talk) 14:40, 9 January 2012 (UTC)