Talk:Indian National Congress/GA2
Latest comment: 2 years ago by 25 Cents FC in topic GA Review
GA Review
edit| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: DaxServer (talk · contribs) 11:51, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
I'm doing a quick fail of the nomination under WP:GAFAIL criteria #2 of copyright violations, those incorporated by the nominator were removed just before the nomination. This is not a comfortable position to review any further. Please improve the article by checking for any further possible copyright violations, among other needed improvements, if any, and re-nominate in the future. — DaxServer (t · c · m) 11:51, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
- Hi, it seems you were in hurry to quick fail the article. You said it does not meet the criteria #2 of copyright violations. Sadly did not care to inform what are those. I will have to ask for second opinion. Generally issues are listed and if not addressed on-timely manner then failed. This is the first time, in fact I am shocked to see such instance. 25 CENTS VICTORIOUS 🍁 12:50, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
- I'd like to hear the second opinion. If I was wrong, I would stand corrected. Let me know once you get the opinion. — DaxServer (t · c · m) 13:53, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
- Apologies mate, if my words determined harsh. I withdraw my plans to go for second opinion. Coming to copyright violations it's all were removed, and review could have been.... Anyway, the reason I am not agrees with the you is; even if it's quick fail, it would have been great help for me if I was given list of issues article posses. I will hold it for a while and re-nominate in the future. Cheers
25 CENTS VICTORIOUS 🍁 18:58, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
- No apologies please mate, your words are not harsh. I will once again review the article and give you a list of issues I find that I think are to be resolved. Sorry I should've done this earlier! Thanks for your good work on the article. BTW, I won't do the next GAN review and let someone else do, so that there won't be any bias from my side :) — DaxServer (t · c · m) 06:25, 13 March 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks for the positive words. I am waiting for your valuable comments. I will resolve all of them as soon I receive it. 25 CENTS VICTORIOUS 🍁 08:13, 14 March 2022 (UTC)
- No apologies please mate, your words are not harsh. I will once again review the article and give you a list of issues I find that I think are to be resolved. Sorry I should've done this earlier! Thanks for your good work on the article. BTW, I won't do the next GAN review and let someone else do, so that there won't be any bias from my side :) — DaxServer (t · c · m) 06:25, 13 March 2022 (UTC)
- Apologies mate, if my words determined harsh. I withdraw my plans to go for second opinion. Coming to copyright violations it's all were removed, and review could have been.... Anyway, the reason I am not agrees with the you is; even if it's quick fail, it would have been great help for me if I was given list of issues article posses. I will hold it for a while and re-nominate in the future. Cheers
- I'd like to hear the second opinion. If I was wrong, I would stand corrected. Let me know once you get the opinion. — DaxServer (t · c · m) 13:53, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
