Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Socialist Left Party (Norway)/1
Socialist Left Party (Norway) 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: delist Cogent reasons why this article is not of Good Article standard have be presented below. No-one appears to be interested in bringing it back to standard at present so the best way forward for the moment would be to delist. Jezhotwells (talk) 08:32, 3 September 2013 (UTC)
I find this article not be completely updated and also somewhat messy. This criticism mainly relates to the sub-sections under Ideology, plus the History sub-secttion "Red-Green Coalition (2005–present)". The latter section starts saying "In the 2009 parliamentary election, the party lost four seats and was left with 11" - mot mentioning that the party entered the government in 2005 (that's briefly mentioned in the section above) and not anything what happend while they were in government 2005-2009. Near the end of the short paragraph, it says " Audun Lysbakken, Heikki Holmås and Bård Vegar Solhjell have announced their candidature for the leader position." Here the tense is not updated, this of course can be easily corrected and does not need a GAR review, but I find it sympthomatic for the article at large, it has not been adequately updated after the GAN. Also, in the Ideology sections with various positions sub-sections I find that the article is lacking in update, with much focus on positions 2000-2005, and some later, but not a whole lot that is really updated. These sections also to some degree appear somewhat random, and doesn't give the impression that someone with great overview have sorted the important things from the less important, and been able to avoid full or partly repetitions. I find for instance find the "Education section" quite repetitive, like when it says at the end: "During the 2005 election, the party promised to increase resources to public schools, believing that more money would lead to fewer pupils per teacher, and thus more individualised and personal instructions." That's not a good end to the section when they now have held the ministry of education for nearly 8 years. Also, the section forgets to mention that Tora Aasland held the position of Minister for higher education and research. - I don't articles on parties are the easiest to write or update and this article may be above the average, but I find it has too many shortcomings to be a certified good article. Regards, Iselilja (talk) 17:04, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
- Delist - statements like "The new leader was to be chosen on an extraordinary party congress in 2012. Audun Lysbakken, Heikki Holmås and Bård Vegar Solhjell have announced their candidature for the leader position" are clearly out of date in their tense, and Iselilja appears to make good points about omissions and other issues here. -- Khazar2 (talk) 12:39, 1 August 2013 (UTC)