Wikipedia

Wikipedia:WikiProject Ireland/Assessment/Request archive

< Wikipedia:WikiProject Ireland‎ | Assessment

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.

2007 assessment requests

Clonmel - I feel that the rating of mid importance should be changed as this does not fit in with the scheme guidelines. Clonmel is a county town, so under the guidelines I believe that he should have a rating of high. If you feel different would you explain why? Also I have been updating the page, and I am wonder how much more work needs to be done to get it up to at least "B". Thanks clichedgeek 22:09, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

CG, if the criteria clearly warrant it being labeled "high" importance, I would say go ahead and make that change.Dppowell 22:25, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Kirsten Sheridan - I just created this biography article, but it is very carefully written, structured, sourced and categorized. I labeled it as "Start", but I think it may be up to "B-class". This director is very young, so while it's short, all available online resources have been sourced and incorporated. I also rated it as of low importance, which I think is quite appropriate. Thanks, Melty girl 18:30, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

  • I agree with the ratings you added. This would need a lot more to become a B-class article. ww2censor 20:02, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Jim Sheridan - I just noticed that this director's article wasn't tagged for your project, so I added it. I made it Start class, since that's how WikiProject Bio assessed it, and it's not tagged as a stub. And I labeled it as of mid importance, though it's possible that you might want to rate it as high. --Melty girl 18:52, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

  • Agree with this rating too, not much more than a stub and mid-importance seems appropriate. Now you need to join the team. Good job. ww2censor 20:02, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Thanks! Oh, and I feel like my expertise is not up to snuff for your project. My very small contribution has been more coincidental, thanks to my films focus. --Melty girl 20:06, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
Ah, but what a contribution! Congrats on the FA, Dppowell 22:26, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
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.


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.

2008 assessment requests

Rowan Gillespie - I would like an outside opinion and a new rating for this article. I have added a large amount of new biographical material, images and links to other artists.Pamela Gardiner (talk) 21:00, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

So Sarah has rated it as a Start-class and Low importance which is likely about correct though it might warrant a mid-rating if you can show his importance over several generations in the Irish world of art.
For me it needs a lot of format tidying and proper references before approaching a B-class. Inline links to external sites belong properly in the external links section unless you set them up to be specifically inline references which use a completely different type of format. Anyway a proper reference section is needed to verify the information as there are no sources quoted, just links given. Also check out WP:FN and WP:CIT for more info on citing sources. Are there any books, or references in books, besides the bio? If so give them. The exhibitions table has an error in it and should be placed before the external links. There is no need to state that the sculpture images are by him, unless they are not his (but then, I assume, they should not be there). I have changed the license on the Kohn image to comply with your license description given at upload. Hope that helps. ww2censor (talk) 22:52, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Little Christmas - Could someone please rate this article. I've tidied it up and added citations, but it's still very short owing to lack of information on it. Dennisc24 (talk) 19:32, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

I have assessed this as Start-class and low-importance especially based on the paucity of references. You might consider merging this article into Epiphany. ww2censor (talk) 04:13, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Once - This is now a B-class article according to Wikipedia:WikiProject_Films/Assessment. There are lots of citations, the writing is fine and all the major topics are covered. It's almost ready to go for GA. Definitely no longer Start-class. Thanks, Melty girl (talk) 18:55, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

It has been re-rated as B/low. ww2censor (talk) 18:59, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks! Hope all is well with you. --Melty girl (talk) 21:30, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Shannonbridge assesment much apprreciated from more experienced users than me. Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Xcghn (talk • contribs) (23:54, January 26, 2008)

It was already assessed as Start/Low on August 12, 2007 by Sarah. I see no reason to change it. ww2censor (talk) 05:51, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Rowan Gillespie, suggestions pleasePamela Gardiner (talk) 21:51, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

  • Cainnech of Aghaboe, I believe this article is within the scope of WikiProject Ireland. It has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale or the importance scale. Any rating would be helpful. Okeeffe.christopher (talk) 08:33, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
Was assessed as B-class/Low. ww2censor (talk) 17:30, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Nóirín Ní Riain, article is based on written public material. Not yet permission to place a photograph but hunting for it. Suggestions and rating would be helpful. Hans Sentis (talk) 18:48, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
Assessed back in December 2007 as Stub/Low but I have revised it as a Start/Low. ww2censor (talk) 17:30, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Frank Browne (photographer) was assessed as Start-class by WP Bio, but since this person was a notable Irish citizen, I'd like WP Ireland to assess the article as well. ArcAngel (talk) 17:27, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
Assessed as Start/Low. ww2censor (talk) 17:39, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Browne may deserve a higher rating than low-importance. I agree with that assessment on the article as it is now, but if his prolific photography work has received widespread recognition, he might perhaps rank as mid-importance, but the article doesn't say what has happened to his photos other than that they have been found. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 17:30, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
Already assessed as Stub/low — assessments requests are just that, this is not an advise column, so please use the article talk page, or the WikiProject talk page as that is more appropriate. ww2censor (talk) 17:23, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
Assessed as Start/Low. ww2censor (talk) 02:13, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
Updated assessment from Stub to Start, but needs grammar, spelling, punctuation to be fixed. It is over-wikified, contains many weasel words and quite a bit of irrelevant verbiage. Really it needs work to even justify the start class, but it is barely past the stub gate.. ww2censor (talk) 23:48, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
Assessed as Start/Low ww2censor (talk) 00:44, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
  • Free Derry - was assessed as Start/Low on 27 March 2008, but has since been expanded, and images added. I personally feel its importance is at least Mid, but that's entirely a matter for the assessor. Scolaire (talk) 18:30, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
Uprated to B-class/Mid-importance. Article has been improved to B-class standard, and I think that the original low-importance rating was slightly underestimating the significance of Free Derry in an all-Ireland context (it wasn't just locally significant). --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 15:01, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
Assessed as Start-class/Mid-importance. Start-class because it as yet is quite short and has no sections (it's really just above stub-class), and Mid-importance because it has been one of Ireland's most significant places of pilgrimage. I'm sure that this article could be expanded a lot, and I hope that there'll be request for re-assessment when it has been improved. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 15:06, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
Assessed as start/low. Low-importance because his significance in Ireland seems to relate solely to the Drapier's Letters controversy; start-class because it has no inline citations. With improved referencing, it would be a clear B-class, and probably a strong good article candidadte. Hope this helps. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 14:52, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
  • Ballykinler Could someone please review this article. I have added some information and belive it may now be upgraded from a stub article. GDD1000 (talk) 16:29, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
    • Updated assessment to Start-class but, references need fixing. they should not be incline links to external sites, but proper references that show up in the reference section — some are rather dubious as verifiable sources. ww2censor (talk) 20:51, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

I have added two pictures to the site for further reviewing. If you'd be kind enough to let me know which links you think are dubious I will do some more work on it. I am currently in the process of tidying up the references as requested. I am a new user and wasn't aware of this until today — my apologies.GDD1000 (talk) 17:09, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

  • Mullinavat I have put alot of work into improving this article. adding areas on economy and enhancing those on traansport. I also cleaned up the history section. I think i should be moved up from a starter wiki . Please review it!
    • It's already assessed as Start/Low and that is about right. It certainly is not a B-class. Needs delinking of non-full dates and common and duplicate words per WP:MOS. Several words are capitalised that should not be. Decent job though. ww2censor (talk) 02:23, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Frank Harte - I have given a lot of information from a variety of sources on this man who is revered by many traditional singers and surely should be rated highly. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Seamasmac (talk • contribs) 07:54, May 17, 2008
    • Already assessed as start/low. ww2censor (talk) 20:40, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
  • North West 200 The North West is one of the largest tourist attractions in Ireland. Should it not be rated higher because of this?
  • "Brown Eyed Girl" article was rated as stubclass by SeoR with WikiProject Ireland on April 22, 2008 when it already had been rated previously by WikiProject Songs and WikiProject Northern Ireland as "start". The article contained much information plus an infobox with Image, audio sample, 26 references and almost 12,000 bytes when it was demoted, so to speak. I'm also a little amazed at the low importance level given the song (perhaps one of the most popular and played songs in of the last 40 years- in the US at least) and it is also in the Grammy Hall of Fame, but I don't know what criteria is used for rating importance in Ireland. Will someone please review it again and check over all the ratings given the Van Morrison articles already by SeoR. Note the album, Wavelength given a rating of B-class. — I'm not saying that's wrong but it makes the stub-class "Brown Eyed Girl" rating a little more inexplicable. The album Astral Weeks rated #19 by Rolling Stones 500 Greatest Albums of All Time and also in Grammy Hall of Fame is also rated as "low importance" (?) Thanks, Agadant (talk) 17:52, 23 May 2008 (UTC) From acclaimedmusic.net: many listings with the album Astral Weeks in the best of album categories. - [1]
Additional information: For comparison to Stub-class rating of "Brown Eyed Girl", here are some articles that are rated as Start-class — (Davy Francis and Francis Harold) -Agadant (talk) 20:36, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
I'll answer for a start, and on the general point first. There are a huge number of Van Morrison articles, including what seems to be one on every song. I believe myself that this is out of line with WP and general encyclopedic norms (most songs should probably be discussed in more general articles) but as I am firmly of the inclusionest persuasion, I have not marked for deletion, but rated what I find. The ratings for WP Ireland are based on the importance to the topic Ireland, and in that regard, I suspect almost all songs, albums, etc, are Low — this still means they are notable, and as I said, I think that to assert that most songs are even notable is dubious. So, I stand over rating Astral Weeks on importance.
On the specific quesion of Brown Eyed Girl, I will check for error, or slip of fingers when using the script, as 12k does sound like Start class indeed. And I rarely dispute the ratings of qulaity by other projects (ratings of importance often do not relate), so I would have tended to respect WP Songs, for example. SeoR (talk) 13:20, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the correction, Ww2censor. In fact that article is a contender even for B-class, so I can only put the stub marker down to a slip of the fingers, apologies. SeoR (talk) 13:22, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for addressing this issue and in reply to the question of the no. of songs listed under Van Morrison: No — not one article for each song, he's written hundreds and it's not out of line with WP or encyclopedic norm either. The songs have mostly been chosen for popularity, critical acclaim or importance on innovation such as - Listen to the Lion. If you compare just one list of rankings of song-writers, such as the most recent and important - 100 Best Living Songwriters - Van Morrison at # (20) on the list, Morrison's number of song articles Van Morrison songs - 97 song articles (probably a third of which are already written cover version song articles) is certainly in line with others on the list such as # (16) David Bowie - David Bowie songs - 200 song articles, # (18) U2 - U2 songs, 116 song articles - # (23) Elton John - Elton John songs, -113 song articles, Bob Dylan has 169 song articles, etc...It's difficult to adequately state a rebuttal without unintentionally sounding brusque and I do feel a bit odd arguing the importance of one of your own countrymen, not mine. Thanks, Agadant (talk) 18:02, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
The difference between B-class and start-class is rather a wide range and I tend to only classify as a B article which really are quite extensive and I don't think Brown Eyed Girl is at that stage yet even though SeoR seems to rate higher than I do. It may be necessary to review our criteria for importance of Irish music and come up with a consensus but in the overall aspect of the WikiProject Ireland, unless it is exceptional and important over generations then a low-importance is all songs like this are likely to get for now. Do remember that both the class and importance are subjective ratings. ww2censor (talk) 05:11, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
I do know that every thing on Wiki is subjective but we all have to try to rise above most of the time or we shouldn't be contributing. All right, I give up on "BEG", but I still say the album Astral Weeks should be a somewhat important article for Ireland WP. Here's an article published in your own Dublin newspaper recently making my case - Junk obscures our greatest treasure Agadant (talk) 16:24, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
(outdent) Now you are making a case for Astral Weeks to be uprated from a low rating, but this assessment is about Brown Eyed Girl! Note that the NI project rating is also a low, so there is consistancy for you in that regard even if you disagree with it. As I stated above, perhaps there is a need to formulate some consensus guidelines for Irish music ratings but that may happen elsewhere within the assessment group, of which a few editors, of those usually active, are unavaiilable right now. BTW, this is a request area and not a discussion page. ww2censor (talk) 16:56, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
Points I have to make and then I'll be on my merry way: (1) I originally mentioned AW on this page also. (2) I wrote to you on your talk page and you didn't answer me. (3) The only ratings on Astral Weeks are WP albums = TOP and WP Ireland = LOW........ Thanks and my talk page is available.....Agadant (talk) 19:13, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Myles Keogh Over the past few months I have made a number of additions to this page — vastly improved — and feel that it could progress to GA. If not, would like to know what further is required.
    • Assessment requests are not really the place for article advise, though I suggest you incorporate the trivia section into the main text where appropriate and the inline external links should be turned into inline citations instead. You should probably add an infobox and possibly check out the GA review page to see if it complies with everything there, if you have not done so yet. ww2censor (talk) 05:11, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Kilkenny County Council - I have removed the redirect to the Kilkenny article and started with informaton and sections. At the moment I would just like an importance rating and know if anyone else is working on other Local Goverment in Ireland articles.
    • Updated from stub to start and rated as low. I am not sure about including current office holders is a good idea because they will be outdated at the next election and who will update them then? ww2censor (talk) 12:49, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Finbar Wright - Updated: added and edited content, added subheaders and photos (Walknnirishrain) (talk) 13:25 3 July 2008
    • Improved, toned down POV, etc., but new images will be a problem with no licence or source. They are likely in copyright. Still unreferenced — links to other wiki articles are not references and a link to his website mainpage is not a reference either. Get some verifiable sources that confirm specific facts in the article that could be questioned and should be sourced. No reason to uprate either class or importance at this time; needs a ton a work to become a B-class article. ww2censor (talk) 18:07, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
      • Additional content and references added — any suggestions as to how to upgrade this article would be appreciated. --Walknnirishrain (talk) 18:05, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
        • Might the importance level be raised a notch, given the achievements in Ireland as a solo performer and the body of work and exposure in the United States as a member of the Irish Tenors? Thanks for the help--Walknnirishrain (talk) 17:01, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
          • Cleaned up References, D/C-ed Notes header. General clean up of article. Hope this helps.--Walknnirishrain (talk) 13:32, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Article rewritten to Wiki standards. Complete annotations and list of Citations added. Cleaned up References, deleted Notes header. This biographical article is meant to note the achievements and accomplishments of a noted performer within Ireland and the United States, as well as continental Europe. Hope this helps settle all issues.--Walknnirishrain (talk) 14:55, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

  • Banagher - I have done extensive updating on this article, including pictures and extensive referencing. There is still some work to be done but I would like to have it assessed to be sure that I am heading in the right direction with it.--Corcs999 (talk) 10:57, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
    • It has been assessed as a C-class/Low article. Nice job indeed. Some of the references do not link to sources that support the statements to which they refer and using references to other wiki pages are not true references — find an appropriate verifiable source for the statement made, consolidate the Civic Week booklet references or fill in the appropriate page numbers. Are there page numbers for the OHAS refs or is there a url? Otherwise well done. ww2censor (talk) 02:13, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
      • I have done as you suggested with the references and made changes according to WP:MOS, particularly around quotations. I have also continued to expand the article and add more pictures. Any pointers on what it needs to get a higher rating? Thanks.--Corcs999 (talk) 23:25, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
        • Since May, when I assessed it the improvemnet is dramatic, so I have uprated to a B-class. Suggest that you now go for a peer review if you want to take it on to GA or even FA. ww2censor (talk) 18:43, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
          • I have gone through the Peer Review process as you suggested and edited the article accordingly. Perhaps it could be reassessed at this stage? Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Corcs999 (talk • contribs) 21:59, 9 September 2008
            • Even after a peer review the next assessment classification is WP:GA and we don't decide that — you must go for a formal GA nomination. Lots of improvement but a few things that I still notice is that there are several duplicate wikilinks and I see Sarah's hand in the forced image sizes. They should not be forced per image use policy. Good luck with a GA. ww2censor (talk) 03:33, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
  • Ballymacnab - I have completed extensive updating of this article, including images and references. I would like an assessment to see if it is worthwhile, I am a relatively new user to Wikipedia. Thanks.
    • I've updated the classification from a stub to a start-class, but there are some issues you should address; some reference do not link to sources that support the statements to which they refer, references to other wiki pages are not true references — find an appropriate verifiable source for the statement made, remove all bold formatting other than title of article per manual of style. Hope that helps. ww2censor (talk) 01:30, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Oxegen 2008 - not perfection but surely deserves better than start-class. I've worked on it considerably. Relevant information has been included as well as sources, photos, recorded material, categories, links, references, etc. Still working on improving it and finding more sources but would just like to see how it appears from an outside point of view and what else can be done to enhance it. :) --Candlewicke Consortiums Limited 14:43, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
    • Also just wondering if it would suit mid-important status for it is fairly important in its own discipline? :) --Candlewicke Consortiums Limited 14:46, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Shankill Butchers - substantially revised and reworded in recent weeks. Caters for the concerns about its being sensationalist and over its reliability. Overall, is of more neutral tone and not colored by bias. Billsmith60 (talk) 23:45, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
This was rated as a Start-class/High back in April but that is off. I re-rated it as C-class/mid-importance based on the priority scale. Even mid-importance is likely too high in the overall wider Irish context; a low would be more appropriate, but it is not of high-importance. I think BHG mis-rated it at that time. ww2censor (talk) 15:26, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
Already rated back in August as C-class/low importance. I agree, the B-class that album project give is too high with no references for the personnel and production sections. ww2censor (talk) 15:26, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
I've never seen any album articles with referenced personnel, but if you see this as absolutely essential it can be done. I'd like to hear your views on the matter first though. Kitchen roll (talk) 16:46, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
It's just my opinion because nowadays we try to reference as much as possible in articles. Perhaps one of the others on the assessment team will provide some extra comments. ww2censor (talk) 18:55, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
  • Judy Garland ancestry the article has potential and can be of interest to various Ireland related topics through national identity, emigration/immigration trends, descendents of the Famine, Irish diaspora , Irish and Irish American Culture, music etc. I beleive it is perhaps B/C quality and a Mid or perhaps High importance given the lasting fame of the subject but would welcome a review and objective grading to guide its further development. Vono (talk)
This was assessed by an anon IP at C/mid, but I have re-rated as low. See priority scale, as a non-specific biographic article it really cannot rate better than low, but the C-class is ok for now. In the overall Irish context it is not very important. ww2censor (talk) 15:26, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
  • Ó Dálaigh I have extensively improved the article on this Irish bardic family, with many in-line citations, and would appreciate an assessment. Urselius (talk) 08:01, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
I reassessed it to C/low after a little reference tidying but suggest you find a few refs for the Name derivation section as that is totally lacking and most statements would certainly be questioned. ww2censor (talk) 14:55, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
Thanks, by "most statements" do you mean the ones without in-line citation, or most in general?Urselius (talk) 15:11, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
Most statement in the "Name Derivation" section could be questioned, so citations should be added. The other sections seem to have decent citations in them. Good luck. ww2censor (talk) 15:15, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
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.


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.

2009 assesment requests

  • The start/low assessment seems about right unless it is expanded. ww2censor (talk) 03:54, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Upgraded from start-class to B-class as it seems well referenced and little else can be added. ww2censor (talk) 04:02, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Uprated from start-class to C-class. Good references but a little short. ww2censor (talk) 04:02, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
Currently assessed as C-class/low which is well justified on the article talk page. ww2censor (talk) 03:54, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
  • This has indeed improved and perhaps should be an example of what can be done with an Irish townland or village article. Certainly a C-class or even a B-class though there are some issues but I will rate it as a B-class for now. Good luck with the peer review. Here is a short list of improvements I would consider. Checklinks shows that several references are missing accessdate and there are a few other problems it shows up but they are not really bad but can easily be fixed. I would be inclined to reduce the panorama image size to 1024 ensure most notebook readers can see the viewed width and move the image down the article to a more appropriate section where some critical discussion takes place about the image, or its content, such as the "Geological environment" section, because the prose is the important thing, images should be used to add to the reader's knowledge of the topic, not just for decoration. The first two paras of both Flora and folk tales are without any citations and there are flora statistics quoted. Where did they come from? Some of the prose seems rather WP:POV or perhaps even WP:OR so you might want to copyedit or ask someone else, but the peer review might help on that front. The "Bohos around the world" section adds nothing; I would remove it and rely on the hatnote that I added. How complete is the article? Is there anything that you know is missing? Cheers ww2censor (talk) 18:57, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
  • One more thing. You should address the lead because it does not summarise the contents of the article per WP:LEDE which says: The lead section should briefly summarize the most important points covered in an article in such a way that it can stand on its own as a concise version of the article. Two or three paragraphs would do it. ww2censor (talk) 23:15, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
  • Updated it to C-class as it does seems well referenced now. ww2censor (talk) 03:54, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
  • This was assessed as a start-class high but I don't think the importance has been that great over generation, so I an reducing the importance to mid but the article's quality is better than a start, so the new rating wil be C/mid. ww2censor (talk) 03:54, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Tony O'Malley. Current start-class and low importance. Submitted for peer review and change in statuses. RogerZoel (talk) 11:38, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
  • The current start-class/low-importance seems about right. The article has a few references but no inline citations to confirm statements in the prose. If you add at least one per paragraph it could easily rise to a C-class article; more than that needs some significant expansion. The references all look like biographical but I would have expected some critical commentary about his art. ww2censor (talk) 03:54, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
That probably would be left up to someone else to do (I actually forgot about this request). Roger Zoel (talk) 23:27, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
  • Mountjoy Square was rated as "low importance" and "stub". I think stub could probably be upgraded now. As for the importance, it's a pretty historic place (see the article), but that's a little more complex to judge. (talk) 12:51, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Reassessed as B-class/Mid importance — much improved with lots of references and good prose. ww2censor (talk) 17:40, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
  • Buntús Cainte was rated as "stub". I've expanded the article — I'd be interested to see how it assessed now. I've no idea how "important" it is, or even how one would assess such a thing, so I'll not comment on that. Jack of Many (talk) 21:55, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
  • I've changed the rating to Start as it clearly isn't a stub any more. I'd still appreciate some input on the assessment though. Feel free to chip in on the article's discussion page with advice re: citations and otherwise improving the quality. Jack of Many (talk) 22:16, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
  • The current start-class/low importance seems about right. ww2censor (talk) 17:40, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
  • Cycling Ireland I've upgraded from Stub to C. Quite a bit of material added with citations, but still quite some way to go. I also think it should be upgraded in importance from Low to Mid. Stephen Roche is considered Mid since he is notable in his discipline, surely the same should apply to this organization. --Eamonnca1 (talk) 18:54, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
Agree, reassessed as Mid-importance. ww2censor (talk) 15:02, 3 April 2010 (UTC)
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.


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.

2010 assessment requests

Agree, I think it fails both WP:NOTREPOSITORY and WP:STAND and should be nominated for deletion. ww2censor (talk) 15:02, 3 April 2010 (UTC)
this was re-rated in February of this year to a C-class. ww2censor (talk) 14:26, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
Reassessed as B-class — I think this should be nominated for GA soon. ww2censor (talk) 14:49, 3 April 2010 (UTC)
Thanks. I need to consider the suggestions at Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Peer review/Irish Mercantile Marine during World War II before GA. I would like to bring this to FA. We are an island nation. ClemMcGann (talk) 15:41, 3 April 2010 (UTC)
Assessed as C-class/Low importance. ww2censor (talk) 15:02, 3 April 2010 (UTC)
Previously assessed as Start/Low which is is about as good as it gets for now. Poor sectionalisation and sources need improvement and general expansion. Sport seems more important than history or basic town information currently relying on unreliable sources. Needs much to improve it. ww2censor (talk) 14:38, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
This was updated recently from stub to start which seems about right though with a little work C-class would seems easy to attain. ww2censor (talk) 14:38, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
  • Riverpoint - I think this article should be assessed in quality. I think it should be upgraded to C-Class as I have put work into this article (Added Infobox and refrences) ShaneMc2010 (talk) 00:45, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
I can't see any significant improvement to upgrade the class quality rating to C from Start because it certainly could not be described as substantial which is a C-class requirement. It is just two paragraphs so is barely even a start-class article. Some people might even call it a stub. ww2censor (talk) 02:55, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
  • Eleanor McEvoy - I would appreciate it if you could assess this article for importance and quality. I believe it has been written, researched, and referenced in a manner that meets the Wiki Standards. The subject of the article, Eleanor McEvoy, is one of the predominate singer/songwriters in Ireland and this article is a completely recognized history of her life and career. Thanks for taking the time to look at it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Editthis2662 (talk • contribs) 07:38, 1 July 2010
Already assessed on June 1, 2010. There has been no significant edits since then that would change that assessment. ww2censor (talk) 15:53, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Larne gun-running - article needs assessed in importance and quality. I believe it now qualifies to be upgraded from a start class article as it is now pretty much complete and conforms more to Wiki standards more than it previously did. Personally i believe it may almost meet GA status. On its importance i believe that the events should be assessed as being of 'high importance' rather than 'mid importance' as it did have serious and major consequences for Irish history as detailed in the article. Northern Star (talk) 11:12, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
Reassessed as C-class back in May; GA requires a nomination and review to be officially done which is not a project function. Importance is subjective and I don't see it being of high-importance in the overall project scale. ww2censor (talk) 15:25, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
Updated to C-class & remove stub template from article. ww2censor (talk) 15:15, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
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.


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.

2011 assessment requests

Updated to C-class and mid-importance but article has several issues that I will add to the talk page. ww2censor (talk) 17:20, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Parliament of Southern Ireland - The article has now had House of Commons of Southern Ireland and Senate of Southern Ireland mergered into it. In addition much (hopefully all but I'm still checking) of the incorrect information which was prevelant across all three pre-merged articles has been corrected. Currently ranked as Stub class. Shatter Resistance (talk) 18:40, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
Updated to B-class. ww2censor (talk) 20:11, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
  • Oireachtas of the Irish Free State - The article has now had a much expanded remit and is no longer unreferenced. I have included basic information on History, Structure (Dáil Éirean, Seanad Éireann, and King of Ireland), and Disbandment, none of which were previously covered. Currently ranked as Start class. Shatter Resistance (talk) 17:59, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
Uprated to C-class and I am torn between B and C but due to the lack of sufficient citations have decided on a C-class for now but will be happy to uprate to B if you can add at least one citation per paragraph. The "Powers" and "Dáil Éireann" sections certainly need some as do others. This article certainly has the potential to become a GA with sufficient citations. Well done and good luck. ww2censor (talk) 22:46, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
  • Kish Bank - I have not edited the article at all, but I stumbled upon it and noticed that, quite probably, it doesn't deserve the Stub class rating anymore. Most of the improvement were made by User:O'Dea. I'd appreciate if someone could take a look at it and reassess. Zidanie5 (talk) 07:56, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
Uprated to start and mid-importance. Could do with expansion and citations for the lighthouse section. The Commissioners of Irish Lights website has quite a bit of material you might be able to use. Good luck. ww2censor (talk) 14:05, 12 November 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for the reassessment, I'll try to improve the article if I can! Zidanie5 (talk) 20:54, 12 November 2011 (UTC)
  • Bankruptcy in the Republic of Ireland - New article, feedback very welcome. Given the commitments given to the EU and the IMF to further amendments to the legislation this article may need to develop significantly in the next few months. FrankFlanagan (talk) 19:25, 5 November 2011 (UTC)
    • As no one else has done this I have rated it at mid importance and agree with C-class for now. Descapitalised some for you. I think the lede really does not summarise the article but is more a definition for what bankruptcy is. Fix that and I would suggest upgrading to B-class. Good luck. ww2censor (talk) 04:07, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
  • Erasmus Smith - Complete overhaul of a very poor stub created on 13 October. I'll be doing a fair bit more work on it over the next few days but I would like to think that this has moved beyond Start Class already. I'd appreciate the addition of any suitable extra categories — I always miss some out, sorry. - Sitush (talk) 12:13, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
  • Nice article. I rated it as a C-class and with rather little work would suggest a B. It could possibly use an infobox with the main personal details. ww2censor (talk) 04:39, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
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.


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.

2012 assessment requests

  • Uprated to C/Mid. Decent coverage but lacking inline citations. I think it could easily become a B-class if worked on. ww2censor (talk) 21:18, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
  • Knockcroghery - Lots of changes and extra information since it was first rated. JD2 (talk) 09:15, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
    • Article still does not meet criteria for B-Class. Scolaire (talk) 11:15, 14 September 2012 (UTC)
  • Roscommon - Complete overhaul of article. Much more comprehensive. JD2 (talk) 09:17, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
    • The article is tagged for multiple issues, none of which have been addressed since May. In particular, there are practically no inline citations. --Scolaire (talk) 11:13, 14 September 2012 (UTC)
  • Shimna River - A lot more information, references, images and an infobox have been added since it was last rated. Sarahj2107 (talk) 14:25, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
    • Upgraded to B-Class. The lead could do with re-writing to better summarise the article. Scolaire (talk) 11:07, 14 September 2012 (UTC)
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.


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.

2013 assessment requests

  • Cloyne - More information and additional images have been added since last assessment.Tomh903 (talk) 20:44, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
  • The article needs more citations and expansion but I have uprated it to a C-class though I think it hardly passes. Good luck. ww2censor (talk) 17:51, 10 March 2013 (UTC)
  • Looks a lot better so have updated to a C-class as I am not convinced it is up to B yet. The Carrickmines issue is for too detailed for this general article especially with virtually no citations. I'm not sure that it is noteworthy enough in its own right to be separated out but it certainly imbalances the article at present. ww2censor (talk) 23:33, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
  • Ronan O'Gara - Huge amount of information and images have been added since the last assessment which rates the article as a start class. I think it deserves at least a C. Tomh903 (talk) 12:21, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Much improved so I have rerated it a B; it might even pass a Good article review. Great work Tomh903 and MunsterFan2011. There are a few statements that I think could do with citations and I will tag them when I get some time. I unforced the images and think the images could be somewhat better arranged. Again well done. ww2censor (talk) 12:59, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Indeed it is much improved so I have updated it to a B but think that some of the organisations mentioned in the lede could be expanded on in the main prose. ww2censor (talk) 19:26, 11 June 2013 (UTC)
Thank you. I'll look into that. Scolaire (talk) 07:56, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
  • Xtra-vision - Has not been assessed yet even though it's a major Irish company. Tomh903 (talk) 16:23, 11 June 2013 (UTC)
  • I've rated it a start but mid importance due to its history but there is little substance to merit a C or B. Thanks ww2censor (talk) 19:12, 11 June 2013 (UTC)
  • Brickens – I asessed this self-written article as C-Class last year but on paying closer attention to the class descriptions and criteria, now I think it qualifies for a higher rating, but I would like an objective review. — O'Dea (talk) 02:46, 21 March 2013 (UTC)
  • I have not reassessed this because I am unsure about some aspect of the article: I find it very odd to see links to external images, especially as their copyright status is unknown, which I think is discouraged and various maps are used as citations even though they don't state the facts alluded to. The article itself does appear to have improved quite a bit but I don't know if the citations/reference are regarded as acceptable. Will get back to you here unless someone else chimes in. ww2censor (talk) 19:26, 11 June 2013 (UTC)
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.


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.

2014 assessment requests

  • Loughgall Ambush – I expanded this article in Dec 2013; it was last assessed as Start-Class in 2010. ~Asarlaí 15:15, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
    • This was reassessed a few days ago as a B-class, perhaps a little high for such a short article but could be improved to really be a solid B. ww2censor (talk) 00:17, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Ballygawley bus bombing – I expanded this article in Aug 2013; it was last assessed as Stub-Class in 2010. ~Asarlaí 15:15, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
    • Now C-class rated. Possibly needs some expansion to become a B-class article. ww2censor (talk)
  • Loughinisland massacre – this was last assessed in 2010 but has been expanded a great deal since then. ~Asarlaí 15:15, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
    • This was uprated by another editor to C-class some time ago. That is about right IMHO. ww2censor (talk) 00:28, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Achaidh Leithdeircc - I expanded this article in Dec 2013; it was last assessed as Stub-class in 2007. ~mervs68 22:19, 16 February 2014 (UTC)
    • I've uprated this to C-class as it has much improved. There are a few issues I see. You should avoid sandwiching prose between images per MOS:IMAGELOCATION, so move one up and one down to avoid this problem, some paragraphs have not inline citations and several citations are bare URLS and these should be fixed using citation templates. ww2censor (talk) 00:11, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
      • Thanks ww2censor for the above, I will try to sort out the issues you mentioned - all the best for now. ~mervs68 11:46, 17 February 2014 (UTC)
  • RTÉ ONE --IrishTV (talk) 19:58, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
    • I've updated it to B-class and it may even be good enough to be nominated as a Good Article. A few pointers: Lede is too short for such a long and detailed article, some citations are bare URLs and some citations should have fuller details in the form of citation templates, replace the capitalisation from citations with sentence case, references that require subscriptions should be mentioned (such as the Irish Times). Good luck. ww2censor (talk) 23:50, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Fair City I've been improving the article on Fair City for some time. I think it should be upgraded from "Start class" to "b-class", as I have added a lot of references for previously unsourced info and cleaned up the article significantly since it was last assessed.Tails3333 (talk) 19:46, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
    • For now I reassessed it to C/Mid but if you can fix the issues mentioned below, then B/Mid might be appropriate. Nearly 25% of the citations are dead (I've run Checklinks on the article), so they needs addressing before a serious reassessment. Otherwise it looks well sourced and pretty comprehensive. I think the lede could be expanded per WP:LEDE and the "Setting" section could be expanded to describe the usual visual settings as opposed to just talking about the locations used. ww2censor (talk)
      • I added a bit more info to the Fair City article, particularly the Lede and Settings sections. I fixed the dead links. Thanks Ww2censor for your assessment. Could you reassess it? Tails3333 (talk) 11:57, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
        • With the extra work done I think a B-class in not inappropriate. Good work. ww2censor (talk) 14:02, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
  • Midleton CBS Secondary School - I have expanded this article significantly since the original assessment so I think it should be upgraded from a Stub-level article. -Tomh903 (talk) 11:06, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
    • As expanded it has been uprated to Start-class. A photo of the school would be nice to have. ww2censor (talk) 14:02, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
  • Garda Emergency Response Unit has a "B-Class" rating, fine, but it's rated as "Low-Importance". Surely considering the fact the ERU has shot dead 9 people since 1990 and been involved in a number of high-profile incidents it warrants at least a "Mid-Importance" rating. Thanks. IrishSpook (talk) 15:50, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
    • I reviewed it earlier today and don't think it rates better than low in the overall Ireland project. It is quite a good article, well done, but in terms of the whole of Irish culture it is quite a minor topic so that does not makes it more important within the approximately 45,000 other Irish articles. ww2censor (talk) 16:25, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
  • Embassy of the United States in Dublin has undergone a major re-edit, and now includes photos, more information in the infobox and a wider ranging history. It's currently only rated as a "Start" and of "Low" importance. Please reassess it, thanks. IrishSpook (talk) 16:42, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
    • It was assessed a few days ago by this edit which I think is fair. All I can see is two additional citations since then. It only comprises six paragraphs plus the lede. ww2censor (talk) 17:29, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Deerfield Residence has had a significant amount of editing since last graded, and has been merged with another page about the same topic, but less information. There's now history, lists, pictures and an infobox. It's currently only a "Start" and rated as "Low" importance. Thank you. IrishSpook (talk) 22:26, 29 May 2014 (UTC)
  • I reassessed it to a C-class. ww2censor (talk) 22:05, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Raymond FitzGerald Not previously linked to the Irish Wiki project despite him leading a major conquest of Ireland. Tomh903 (talk) 21:29, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
 Done @Tomh903: ww2censor (talk) 22:05, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
On the basis of the expansion since last review, this is now rated B-class. ww2censor (talk) 22:09, 14 November 2014 (UTC)
  • Molana Abbey - Barely a paragraph long when it was last rated a stub. Significantly improved since. Tomh903 (talk) 20:23, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
I've rerated this up to a C-class. It cartainly has been expanded a lot. ww2censor (talk) 21:43, 14 November 2014 (UTC)
Defintely not a stub but with so few references it can hardly justify a C, so start-class for now. ww2censor (talk) 21:43, 14 November 2014 (UTC)
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.


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.

2015 assessment requests

  • Maybe I'm a little generous but I rerated it at B-class. There are paragraphs that could do with citations but it's quite a nice informative article. Well done. ww2censor (talk) 10:08, 18 February 2015 (UTC)
  • Thank you for assessing the article. I will add the necessary citations to those paragraphs. Regards, Bede735 (talk) 12:42, 18 February 2015 (UTC)


I reassessed it as a B-class/Low importance on 3 May 2015. ww2censor (talk) 15:24, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
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.


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.

2016 assessment requests

  • Old Belvedere Cricket Club - Article has recently been expanded by another editor to the point that it might no longer be considered a stub. There are several ongoing discussions on the article's talk page, so any comments from those familiar with cricket in general or this particular club would be most welcome. Thanks in advance. -- Marchjuly (talk) 12:14, 12 April 2016 (UTC)


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.


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.

2018 assessment requests

  • Provinces of Ireland, I did a major overhaul of this article last year and would like it rated as it has a start rating, which is no longer merited. Mabuska (talk) 14:53, 15 January 2018 (UTC)
Reassessed as C-class but might even be worth a B. Remind me later and I'll reread it. ww2censor (talk) 15:14, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
  • Holy Trinity Church, Cork - I expanded this article several times over for a DYK last month. I'd love to get it to GA but I only have one book to work off. I'd love to see it reassessed, since it's clearly no longer a stub. ~ Maltrópa loquace 18:50, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
Maltrópa: Reassessed as a C-class. As you are using so many citations from the same book, perhaps you might use the reference page template {{rp}} instead of repeating the same citation with page numbers (check out the wikilink to see how to use it or look at this article). ww2censor (talk) 17:11, 18 February 2018 (UTC)
Reassessed as C-class, and Mid-importance. SeoR (talk) 17:48, 23 March 2018 (UTC)
 Comment: Actually this article is now more about the Eircode, which is only one aspect of Irish addresses than the whole postal addressing in Ireland, so really needs to be rewritten and split but that's another issue. Personally I don't think either parts of the topic are more than of low importance. ww2censor (talk) 21:05, 23 March 2018 (UTC)
Thanks! It has a strange history, with the geocode / eircode aspect being merged in, and a little bit taking-over, yes, but it does still cover the Dublin (and semi-secret Cork) postal districts, so I thought that was adequate, at least for C. On importance, I will not quarrel with someone re-rating, but I assessed that the conventions for national addressing might rise to Mid. SeoR (talk) 21:17, 23 March 2018 (UTC)
Support reassessment, and I believe that the quality has been improved, and uprating, with guiding comments, is relevant. As to importance, I'm not sure; even Low = Notable, Mid = prominent, the bar for High is, well, rather high. But anyway, as I have interacted in recent edits, I leave actual reassessment to another hand. SeoR (talk) 17:48, 23 March 2018 (UTC)
I've reassessed it as a C-class but don't think it yet warrants more than a Low-importance in the overall Ireland project. ww2censor (talk) 21:05, 23 March 2018 (UTC)
Thanks! It is hard to call on importance, and I think we someday need to review the higher categories, which have some strange members, and as simply being included means notable status... But thanks to Britishfinance for a week of solid editing, and attention to comments. SeoR (talk) 21:17, 23 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Templeogue and Brickens articles – May deserve A or GA quality assessments. The mix of quality–ranking criteria is somewhat open to interpretation, so I am unsure. — O'Dea (talk) 04:13, 2 April 2018 (UTC)
O'Dea, I'm sorry to tell you that A and GA-class articles have specific nomination processes outside the scope this project and the A-class has never been implemented in the Ireland project. IMHO I'm pretty certain neither of these would make it even close. Perhaps reading some of the Irish GA articles will give you a sense of what makes the grade. Out of almost 80,000 article we have just 154 GAs. We rate up to B-class. Neither of these articles even have an image of the town in the infobox, but a road sign. I would not have rated Templeogue at a B-class now but I won't downgrade it even though it was you who rated it B and are a significant contributor to the article. It has much in the lede that is not in the body of the article, the development section has no citations and several other statements are also unsourced. The notable people section has no sources, some of the entries don't even mention the place and other are just categorised a being from there but with no prose or source in the article itself; these really should have verification for the higher class ratings. Brickens is just about correct at C-class. You might find it useful to reference Wikipedia:WikiProject Cities/Settlements: Article structure. Good luck. ww2censor (talk) 11:09, 2 April 2018 (UTC)
Ww2censor Thank you. I sought someone else's assessment because the descriptions of the criteria for the different classes, A, B, C, etc., are unclear to me. In some ways, the criteria appear to be quite forgiving, and in other ways, quite strict. I find them to be not well written because they leave a great deal up to personal interpretation. At first, I thought my articles weren't so special, but after reading the criteria, I wondered if I was being too hard on the articles I nominated, and if they might deserve an upgrade I had not really expected. Anyway, thank you for having a look. I am not disappointed by your assessment at all, but the narrative describing how the classes should be applied could use clarification and more precision. — O'Dea (talk) 12:47, 2 April 2018 (UTC)
Thanks O'Dea. It's not an exact science; project assessments are indeed subjective and some people are quite conservative while others are not so strict. I've assessed hundreds, maybe even thousands of mainly Irish articles and few editors have complained or objected to my assessment and/or had them reassessed differently, so I can't be doing too badly. I'll review the criteria with some other editors and see if it needs more detail or clarification but it was written about 10 year ago but is based on the main wiki editorial assessment scheme. Perhaps you could post your specific concerns on the talk page. Cheers ww2censor (talk) 13:11, 2 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Corporation tax in the Republic of Ireland materially upgraded this article (was just bits of history that were mostly unreferenced) and added more current material and data in it (as well as upgrading the history from 1987 onwards). A boring but important area given that Ireland's economy is driven by corporate tax planning for multinationals. Would be interested to see if it is worth an upgrade ? Britishfinance (talk) 20:04, 4 April 2018 (UTC)
Bogger: I think it would be extremely generous to uprate this to a C-class, being such a short article. I have however improved the details in the image file that was missing an information template. I don't often review this page, so apologies for the tardy response. ww2censor (talk) 09:38, 19 August 2018 (UTC)
Stevecull: I've uprated it to a C-class and made some small edits. It really requires an infobox and could do with using citation templates instead of freeform citations that omit much detail. ww2censor (talk) 09:19, 19 August 2018 (UTC)
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.


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.

2019 assessment requests

  • Dundalk F.C. Requesting reassessment. Completely overhauled. Should be B, minimum, going by standards. (user:sexitoni, 19:48, 7 May 2019 (UTC))
This was already assessed as B-Class by WikiProject Football. I have updated on that basis. Have you thought about Good Article nomination? --Scolaire (talk) 13:05, 8 May 2019 (UTC)
I have nominated it now, thank you --User:Sexitoni (talk) 16:30, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Oriel Park Requesting reassessment. Overhauled. Hoping to promote above start. (user:sexitoni, 16:48, 10 May 2019 (UTC))
sexitoni: This is certainly no longer a Start-class article though I am not so sure about it being more than a C-class which what I have rerated it to. ww2censor (talk) 16:40, 12 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Edward Shortt Currently start class but significant expansion and referencing has taken place. Should be at least C, possibly B. --Leonstojka (talk) 23:38, 11 August 2019 (UTC)
Leonstojka: I reassessed this up to a C-class too. ww2censor (talk) 16:40, 12 August 2019 (UTC)
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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Ireland/Assessment/Request_archive&oldid=1141873767"