Talk:Fort Pasir Panjang
 | Fort Pasir Panjang was one of the Warfare good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. | ||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
 | A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on July 1, 2007. The text of the entry was: Did you know ...that Fort Pasir Panjang, part of the 11 coastal fortifications built to repel the Japanese invasion, saw little action during the Battle of Singapore? | ||||||||||||
| Current status: Delisted good article | |||||||||||||
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
External links modified edit
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Fort Pasir Panjang. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070704195335/http://infopedia.nlb.gov.sg/articles/SIP_14_2005-01-25.html to http://infopedia.nlb.gov.sg/articles/SIP_14_2005-01-25.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:32, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
GA Reassessment edit
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 • • Most recent review
- Result: General consensus to delist. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 01:30, 22 April 2023 (UTC)
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)
- 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)
- 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)
- Delist sadly, needs some restructuring and re-sourcing, which is a significant body of work. CMD (talk) 01:46, 16 April 2023 (UTC)