Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Spanish Civil War/1

Spanish Civil War 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: keep No specific rationale has been presented for delisting, just assertions. Consensus appears to be towards keep. Jezhotwells (talk) 07:45, 9 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This is article, given the importance of the subject, is of very poor quality. The article lacks encycolpeadic content and has too much opinion. Sources are highly limited and the structure of the article is not good. A good quality article appears on Spanish wiki. It seems that a very good quality article can easily be achieved by using the Spanish sources etc. It seems to me that even a simple auto translation would improve the article. https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guerra_Civil_Espa%C3%B1ola Isthisuseful (talk) 21:12, 10 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

WP:SIZE suggests that articles should not be longer than 6 to 10 thousand words, and the article is currently right at the upper end of that - in contrast to the Spanish article which is many times over. The purpose of the SIZE guideline is to enforce summary style. While the article could be improved, the comparison to the Spanish article must be seen in this light. Instead the question is one of balance: are sections too long/short relevant to each other? Reference to the Good Article criteria would help me to understand better. Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 11:14, 11 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please list, against the Good Article criteria, the specific faults that you find. Your comments above are vague and do not help provide a rationale for a community re-assessment. Jezhotwells (talk) 12:16, 11 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as GA - it's been ten days now without any specific rationale being presented to delist the article. -- Khazar2 (talk) 23:20, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - There's a clarification needed tag that should probably be addressed. Other than that, I can't find any serious issues with the article.--FutureTrillionaire (talk) 22:34, 24 July 2013 (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.