Talk:Ford Taurus/GA1

GA Reassessment

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

---

This review is part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles/Project quality task force/Sweeps, a project devoted to re-reviewing Good Articles listed before August 26, 2007.

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose quality:

   B. MoS compliance:

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. References to sources:

   B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

   Article suffers from trivia creep, some uncited statements and whole uncited paragraphs.

   C. No original research:

   Uncited statements may contain original research.

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   B. Focused:

4. Is it neutral?

   Fair representation without bias:

5. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

   A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

   B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

   Overall a good article, just needs a little maintenance. Article will be placed on hold until issues can be addressed. If an editor does not express interest in addressing these issues within seven days, the article will be delisted. --ErgoSum•talk•trib 19:07, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

I went through and removed a couple of unneeded unsourced statements and trivia. Let me know if anything else needs to be done. --Leivick (talk) 03:14, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

So far so good, but there are still large gaps between citations. Reviewers like me typically like to see at least one citation per paragraph, so there is no question where this information came from. The second halves of the second and third paragraphs (1st gen) are uncited. There is a bit about foreign models (3rd gen) which is uncited. First paragraph in 4th gen. And so on, I didn't check the rest but I gotta get going. --ErgoSum•talk•trib 11:46, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

I have started some basic maintainence. If you can name some specific of what you mean as "Trivia creep", I will remove it. Karrmann (talk) 03:03, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

I can extend the hold time if necessary, so don't worry about the time limit. The "trivia creep" has been deleted, so don't worry about it. The last issue that is keeping me from passing the article are the uncited statements. At least one per paragraph, and there is also a tagged statement in the introduction. These are the only things keeping this from being a Good Article. --ErgoSum•talk•trib 03:58, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

This article has been delisted due to a lack of progress. Feel free to renominate when these issues have been addressed. --ErgoSum•talk•trib 22:03, 19 June 2009 (UTC)