Talk:Luke Ravenstahl/GA2
GA Reassessment
[edit]Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
This article has been on my watch list, and I was surprised to find today that it was a GA.
- Not neutral. It seems to vacillate between overly glowing praise (See Pittsburgh promise and Market Square revitalization) and a list of unflattering incidents (see the entire Criticism and controversies especially Questionable use of police vehicle, Banner-Gate, and, I kid you not Other incidents which is literally a list of criticisms). This thing is a textbook WP:Coatrack, but for both pro-and anti-Ravenstahl POV warriors, with each side taking control of different parts of the same article. See the talkpage for more on that battle. Basically, I think the whole article beginning with his term as mayor needs to be re-written. Until then, it's far from GA material.--GrapedApe (talk) 23:59, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
- How goes the reassessment? AIRcorn (talk) 12:56, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
- Not well, no one has begun the reassessment.--GrapedApe (talk) 14:42, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
- Technically you have by choosing an individual assessment. Basically you need to say what is wrong with the article (like above) and then let major contributors and wikiprojects know. If your concerns are addressed you can list is as kept, if they are not delist. You may be wanting a community reassessment instead, where other editors chime in on the suitability of an Good article. AIRcorn (talk) 22:17, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
- In that case, this should be de-listed. It's been >1 month, and no effort from any number of notified projects [1][2][3][4]. Please advise on next step--GrapedApe (talk) 22:54, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
- Write a note here saying that it has been delisted (usually bolded). Remove the {{GAR/link|23:50, 29 May 2012 (UTC)|page=2|GARpage=1|status= }} template from the talk page and update the article history one. Just add action2=GAR, action2date=the date etc and change current status to DGA (delisted Good article). Then go to Wikipedia:Good articles/Social sciences and society and delete the article from the list. I can double check everything for you. AIRcorn (talk) 23:53, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
- Oh and change the Wikiproject ratings to B or whatever you think is appropriate. AIRcorn (talk) 23:55, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
- In that case, this should be de-listed. It's been >1 month, and no effort from any number of notified projects [1][2][3][4]. Please advise on next step--GrapedApe (talk) 22:54, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
- Technically you have by choosing an individual assessment. Basically you need to say what is wrong with the article (like above) and then let major contributors and wikiprojects know. If your concerns are addressed you can list is as kept, if they are not delist. You may be wanting a community reassessment instead, where other editors chime in on the suitability of an Good article. AIRcorn (talk) 22:17, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
- Not well, no one has begun the reassessment.--GrapedApe (talk) 14:42, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
- De-listed--GrapedApe (talk) 02:29, 5 July 2012 (UTC)