Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Mars (mythology)/1

Mars (mythology) edit

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch article reassessment page • Most recent review

Has everyone not have the time for this one? Please review. Adamdaley (talk) 21:12, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Result: Delisted based on consensus after two-month-long review Ian Rose (talk) 12:57, 28 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I have gone through the entire article and adding {{citations needed}} to sections where I feel a citation/source/reference is needed. Other than that, I do not think that this article is deservingly of a "GA-class" assessment let alone a "B-class" assessment. Adamdaley (talk) 00:31, 21 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delist: Unfortunately I don't think that this article (in its current state) completely meets the "verifiable with no original research" criterion at the moment as there are a number of sentences/areas that appear to be unreferenced. If references could be added where the nominator has marked with "cn" tags, I'd be more than happy to change my mind. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 22:55, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delist: while this article is in fairly good shape it does appear to be missing citations in a few key areas which mean in its current state it doesn't meet the GA criteria per ARs comments above. That said it doesn't look like it would be too difficult to salvage if someone with some knowledge of the subject matter was able to furnish the citations required. If I had the required sources I'd add them myself but unfortunately I do not. Anotherclown (talk) 09:26, 2 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delist: With citations missing in many places in the article, it doesn't even meet B-class standards. Cuprum17 (talk) 15:11, 2 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]