Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Colony collapse disorder/1: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 20:55, 22 January 2023

Colony collapse disorder

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

Result pending

The article has 19 cn tags, at least one failed verification, and is in need of updating (a lot of the science uses 10-yr old sources). —Femke 🐦 (talk) 19:21, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delist as failing criterion 2 (sourcing) and criterion 3 (broadness, including up-to-date research). ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 11:26, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delist as someone involved in the article. I've been sporadically and slowly working on updating the article with scientific reliable sources, but I will admit it is not in a great state right now where I would consider it qualifying for GA. One of the key problems I've run into is people adding in sources on general bee health issues and confusing that with CCD, which has very specific symptoms outlined in the sourced part of Colony_collapse_disorder#Signs_and_symptoms. Old sources are not inherently bad because a lot of the CCD research and reviews were back from around 10 years ago, and I haven't seen updates recently that showed a major sea-change in anything on the entomology front. Definitely willing to do some heavy lifting on it in a month or two though (or ping me then to give me a little kick). KoA (talk) 20:34, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delist Unfortunately I too must agree, even though many of the Sources are ten odd years old, that does not make them invalid, it's just that some of them could be better, and some more up to date info. could be added with recent research as sources, but generally not changing the CCD overview: But it does need to be cleaned up; this will take a bit of time, I have seen wiki editors not overly familiar with a subject and make edits throughout a page that takes a long time to fix. I would say with this now on the radar of some of us, we should be able to fix this page in the next couple or so months. Bibby (talk) 20:55, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 7: / Line 7: @@
 *'''Delist''' as failing criterion 2 (sourcing) and criterion 3 (broadness, including up-to-date research). [[User:AirshipJungleman29|~~ AirshipJungleman29]] ([[User talk:AirshipJungleman29|talk]]) 11:26, 22 January 2023 (UTC)
 *'''Delist''' as someone involved in the article. I've been sporadically and slowly working on updating the article with scientific reliable sources, but I will admit it is not in a great state right now where I would consider it qualifying for GA. One of the key problems I've run into is people adding in sources on general bee health issues and confusing that with CCD, which has very specific symptoms outlined in the sourced part of [[Colony_collapse_disorder#Signs_and_symptoms]]. Old sources are not inherently bad because a lot of the CCD research and reviews were back from around 10 years ago, and I haven't seen updates recently that showed a major sea-change in anything on the entomology front. Definitely willing to do some heavy lifting on it in a month or two though (or ping me then to give me a little kick). [[User:KoA|KoA]] ([[User talk:KoA|talk]]) 20:34, 22 January 2023 (UTC)
+*'''Delist''' Unfortunately I too must agree, even though many of the Sources are ten odd years old, that does not make them invalid, it's just that some of them could be better, and some more up to date info. could be added with recent research as sources, but generally not changing the CCD overview: But it does need to be cleaned up; this will take a bit of time, I have seen wiki editors not overly familiar with a subject and make edits throughout a page that takes a long time to fix. I would say with this now on the radar of some of us, we should be able to fix this page in the next couple or so months. [[User:Is123Biblio|Bibby]] ([[User talk:Is123Biblio|talk]]) 20:55, 22 January 2023 (UTC)