Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Joseph Goebbels/1

Joseph Goebbels edit

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch article reassessment page • GAN review not found

Result: Delisted Currently the article does not contain enough references to be considered of Good quality AIRcorn (talk) 01:54, 1 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Article has numerous unreferenced or poorly referenced claims. The article also contains bias in some parts aswell as a lack of appropriate tone.

For these reasons I am nominating it for community reassesment.Retrolord (talk) 23:37, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for nominating this for reassessment. Have you notified the major contributors and the Wikiprojects? AIRcorn (talk) 04:46, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am unsure of how to do so. Retrolord (talk) 05:04, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You can find the top contributors to the article here. The Wikiprojects are on the articles talk page (Germany and Military History should suffice). You should also let the reviewer and nominator know Insanephantom (talk · contribs) and Pudeo (talk · contribs) respectively. You can just copy-paste {{subst:GARMessage|Joseph Goebbels|GARpage=1}} to the talk pages if you wish. AIRcorn (talk) 00:59, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delist - Extensive unreferenced information. For several paragraphs that appear to be referenced, the reference only supports the info at the very end (last sentence or two), with the remainder unreferenced. Unreferenced quotes, opinions, potentially controversial information. At least one reference to a forum - not RS. Nothing has been done to improve the article in the month since it was brought here. Dana boomer (talk) 15:58, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with the Delist. But how do we go about doing so, do we just remove it from the list or do we have to do a complete review of the article? ★★Retro Lord ★★ 21:59, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Since you have started a community reassessment it is up to an uninvolved editor to close it. I am about to do a run through now. If you see articles you don't think meet the criteria in the future then you can always do an individual reassessment. They are the similar to these, but you can close them yourself. Think of it like a normal review. If the delisting is likely to be controversial I would recommend bringing it here though. AIRcorn (talk) 01:47, 1 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The article has bee now delisted (I agree with that). --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 02:49, 7 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]