Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Fort Pasir Panjang/1

Fort Pasir Panjang[edit]

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 • Watch article reassessment page • Most recent review

Result: General consensus to delist. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 01:30, 22 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

GA from 2007. Has been tagged for needing additional citations since September 2022. Especially since sections like the first paragraph of defenses and aftermath have no sources cited. Onegreatjoke (talk) 17:59, 15 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delist. Poor structure that relies on the (too short) lede for the first section to make much sense, thirteen instances of missing citations, no infobox for no obvious reason, and mediocre sourcing/referencing at best. Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 18:09, 15 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delist – not only is the source poor, as mentioned, but the quality of the writing is also well below what I would expect for a GA. The first sentence of the body is as good an example as any: "Labrador was named after Labrador Bay which it overlooks the deep and calm water off its shores." What? This would need a complete rewrite with sources. Harrias ^{(he/him) • talk} 20:07, 15 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delist sadly, needs some restructuring and re-sourcing, which is a significant body of work. CMD (talk) 01:46, 16 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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.