Talk:Cologne Central Mosque/GA1

GA Review

This article is tagged as a future building. I would wait till it is completed then renominate. Tom (talk) 21:18, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think that is a justified reason to fail it for GA status. GA status is based on the article's quality and not on the subject matter. The notability of the article's subject matter derives not from its completion, but its proposal.

Secondly, what if the mosque is never completed? It will still have been notable, and there still will be sufficient content for a GA article.Bless sins (talk) 01:31, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There was discussion here Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Trump International Hotel and Tower (Chicago)/1 about whether articles on buildings under construction presented a GA stability issue, particularly in late stages of construction. Construction on Cologne project hasn't even started yet. You're always welcome to go and ask another editor their opinion e.g. one of the people in the discussion i've linked to. The article's sources all need to have titles rather than just the hyperlink path and also publishers and accessdates. Need to check external links can use [1]. Kind regards Tom B (talk) 10:49, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have to say that I would concur with the editor above. The article cannot be expected to be stable until the mosque has actually been built. MSGJ 13:04, 4 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

According to whose crystal ball? Note that the article is about the project and the controversy, as well as the proposed building. Geometry guy 14:59, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yet it has been stable since March, which is a period of 8 months. Infact nothing notable has happened. Suppose this mosque was never built, i.e. it just disappeared from news stories. Would this mena this article could never become a good article?Bless sins (talk) 02:07, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also the example of "Trump International Hotel and Tower (Chicago)" was brought as an example of a building under construction. Yet this article is today a good article, is it not?Bless sins (talk) 02:08, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Secondly, there is no guarantee that this mosque topic will be stable once its built. What if it is attacked? Or maybe shut down? This isn't unusual considering other mosques in Europe ([2], [3]). Does this mean this article should never be a good article? I'd like to think not.Bless sins (talk) 02:23, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bless sins is quite correct. There is nothing in principle preventing this article attaining GA status, and it should therefore be given a proper review. The stability criterion (It is Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute) is clearly satisfied. See WT:Good article nominations#Rejecting_an_article_on_its_subject_not_merit. Geometry guy 14:59, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]