Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Mikkeli/1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Mikkeli[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) · WatchWatch article reassessment pageMost recent review
Result: Delisted per consensus. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 15:58, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

GA from 2014. There's quite a lot of uncited material in the article. Onegreatjoke (talk) 21:42, 29 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delist - A lot of stubby, unreferenced paragraphs too. 141Pr {contribs} 10:21, 2 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delist - with the caveat that the GA criteria (and the MOS) need far fewer citations than most people thing (essentially limited to quotation/paraphrase and matter that has been or is likely to be challenged), I can't see that this one would pass a GA nomination today without serious work. UndercoverClassicist (talk) 21:11, 2 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You were about fourteen hours too late to be right, UndercoverClassicist. The criteria have changed. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 16:35, 4 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, I didn't see that! Only makes things more clear-cut, then. UndercoverClassicist (talk) 17:05, 4 July 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.