Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Otelo Saraiva de Carvalho/1
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
- Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • • Most recent review
- Result: Delisted. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 21:00, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
The article contains uncited prose, including entire paragraphs. The "FUP/FP 25 de abril: imprisonment and release" section relies too much on quotes. The article requires a copyedit for translation concerns and formatting. Z1720 (talk) 16:30, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
- A bit of a drive by; I reviewed this and promoted it seven years ago. Then it had 1,100 words, all of them cited and none of them quotes. The article has since more than tripled in size and quality control seems to have slipped a little. On a skim I would have thought that simply removing every quote and everything that is uncited would leave a reasonably full and balanced article needing minimal copy editing to be salvageable. Gog the Mild (talk) 17:17, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Gog the Mild: If uncited information is removed, will any main aspects also be removed? (Referencing WIAGA 3a. I understand if an editor cannot undertake the review to answer this question. Z1720 (talk) 17:45, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- IMO no, 3a will be fine - but then, I promoted it when it was a third the size. It will leave some wobbley use of English, a dangling "However", some six and eight word paragraphs; but IMO nothing that would have caused it to be brought to GAR. I am loath to get pulled into fully fixing this article as I have more than enough on already. Gog the Mild (talk) 18:02, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- I usually avoid bringing articles to GAR for copyedit issues (unless it is REALLY bad); I brought it up because there was also citation concerns, and I noticed the copyedit concerns at the same time. I am happy to take a closer look and do some copyediting if others want. Z1720 (talk) 19:11, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- IMO no, 3a will be fine - but then, I promoted it when it was a third the size. It will leave some wobbley use of English, a dangling "However", some six and eight word paragraphs; but IMO nothing that would have caused it to be brought to GAR. I am loath to get pulled into fully fixing this article as I have more than enough on already. Gog the Mild (talk) 18:02, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Z1720 and Gog the Mild: where does this GAR stand? ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 13:14, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- Delist. Unresolved citation needed tags, work seems to have stalled. Z1720 (talk) 02:17, 13 February 2025 (UTC)
- @Gog the Mild It seems that you were active today so what is your take on this GAR? All Tomorrows No Yesterdays (Ughhh.... What did I do wrong this time?) 13:17, 14 February 2025 (UTC)
- My take is that you need to work on your Wiki etiquette. Gog the Mild (talk) 14:28, 14 February 2025 (UTC)
- Regarding the article, as it has changed only minimally over the past five weeks, my opinion expressed on 10 January has also changed only minimally. Gog the Mild (talk) 14:28, 14 February 2025 (UTC)
- My take is that you need to work on your Wiki etiquette. Gog the Mild (talk) 14:28, 14 February 2025 (UTC)
- Delist. Unresolved citation needed tags, work seems to have stalled. Z1720 (talk) 02:17, 13 February 2025 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.