Talk:Terence Wade

Terence Wade was nominated as a Social sciences and society good article, but it did not meet the good article criteria at the time (May 22, 2018). There are suggestions on the review page for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated.

This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Biography: Science and Academia This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles This article is supported by the science and academia work group (assessed as Low-importance). An editor has requested that an image or photograph be added to this article. Education Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Education, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of education and education-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EducationWikipedia:WikiProject EducationTemplate:WikiProject Educationeducation articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Linguistics Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Linguistics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of linguistics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LinguisticsWikipedia:WikiProject LinguisticsTemplate:WikiProject LinguisticsLinguistics articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Russia: Language & literature Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Russia, a WikiProject dedicated to coverage of Russia on Wikipedia. To participate: Feel free to edit the article attached to this page, join up at the project page, or contribute to the project discussion.RussiaWikipedia:WikiProject RussiaTemplate:WikiProject RussiaRussia articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by the language and literature of Russia task force. Scotland Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Scotland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Scotland and Scotland-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ScotlandWikipedia:WikiProject ScotlandTemplate:WikiProject ScotlandScotland articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This review is

transcluded from Talk:Terence Wade/GA1

. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Barkeep49 (talk · contribs) 00:31, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Criteria

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (

   lists

   ):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (

   reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism

   ):

   Some sources were unavailable to reviewer but passed AGF.

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   Areas with ? would have parts that could be improved through a typical GA review but aren't necessarily not meeting the standard now

Discussion

Can Ajmint or other active editor confirm that they remain interested in going through the GA process? Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 00:31, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Closing as failed due to lack of interested editor response. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 20:51, 7 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Reopening nomination

Allowing anything less than seven days, when an article was waiting for over eight months to find a reviewer, is too harsh; better two weeks or more. This isn't a race, and there's no harm in extra time. Barkeep49, I have reverted your close; if you're not interested in giving this nomination time, then I'll be happy to put the nomination back into the pool of articles awaiting a nominator. Eight months is a very long time for a nominator to wait, and circumstances change, or the review ultimately comes at a bad moment. Ajmint last edited a month ago; perhaps you could inquire at the various WikiProjects to see whether someone would be willing to take on the task of making edits to address your concerns during the review process. BlueMoonset (talk) 21:57, 7 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@BlueMoonset: As indicated on you talk page I erred in closing this now. Assuming there is an editor willing to make changes I remain interested in doing the review. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 21:59, 7 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]