Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Linux/1

Linux

 * • Watch article reassessment page • GAN review not found
 * Result: Delisted This article does not meet the GA criteria in its present state. There are 3 votes to delist, and there has been no meaningful debate to keep. Aaron north  (T/C) 05:40, 7 December 2010 (UTC)


 * [citation needed] in intro.
 * Even though the lead is heavily cited in this article, citations are not usually required in the lead, because it shouldn't be necessary. The lead is supposed to be a summary of the article, and no information should be in the lead that is not found (and cited if a citation is needed for the claim) in the article. I may have missed it, but I couldn't find where (Linux is the leading server OS, accounting for more than 50% of installations) came from in the article, so rather than a criteria 2 problem, this would primarily seem to be a criteria 1b problem. Aaron north  (T/C) 17:26, 13 November 2010 (UTC)
 * [clarifiction needed] in "Unix" section of History.
 * Unreferenced portions: "Unix" and "Current Development" sections under History; first two paragraphs of "Design"; third and fourth paragraphs of "Development" header and several more.
 * Many one- and two-sentence paragraphs throughout. "User Interface" subsection in particular (under Design) is especially choppy.
 * Many sources don't have the name of the work in them.
 * "Three factors that have been cited to prevent large-scale Linux adaptation which are…" (under "Market share and update" subheader) seems like it should be just prose, not a bullet list.

Overall, the main issue is the quality of the prose. I think that it is in dire need of a copyedit, and maybe a trawl through the sources to make sure they're all good.

Also, I can't find the GAN anywhere. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Otters want attention) 04:31, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Looks like the GAN was in Archive 19 Aaron north  (T/C) 17:26, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

Delist This article clearly fails the GA criteria for several reasons. The article definitely needs a good copyedit (1a), we appear to have a 1b problem in the lead, entire subsections are uncited (criteria 2), and we appear to have 3a problems where important details are vaguely hinted at but not expanded upon. Aaron north  (T/C) 17:26, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

Fixed the problem with "three factors" 1nt2 (talk) 03:58, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Also fixed problems with the User Interface part of Design section.1nt2 (talk) 04:00, 16 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Delist The article currently fails GA criteria, including File:Samsung-i9000-galaxy-s.jpg which has no source, and it is not low resolution (fails criteria 6 and WP:NFCC#8). JJ98 (Talk) 02:22, 27 November 2010 (UTC)