Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Black Panther (film)/1: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
←Created page with '{{subst:GAR/header}} <!-- Please add the rationale for reassessment below this comment. Subsequent discussion should be added below, until the reassessment is cl...' |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
<!-- Please add the rationale for reassessment below this comment. Subsequent discussion should be added below, until the reassessment is closed.--> |
<!-- Please add the rationale for reassessment below this comment. Subsequent discussion should be added below, until the reassessment is closed.--> |
||
The original GA review was not thorough, and missed a large amount of textual plagiarism (see the talk page and the most recent archive). It's got to the point that the only parts of the article that I'm convinced are clean are the [[WP:QUOTEFARM|awkwardly large volume of direct quotations]]. The original nominator and other contributors have been reluctant do the heavy lifting of sweeping the article of this plagiarism. I don't think there's anything for it at this point but GAR. [[User:Hijiri88|Hijiri 88]] (<small>[[User talk:Hijiri88|聖]][[Special:Contributions/Hijiri88|やや]]</small>) 13:01, 5 April 2019 (UTC) |
The original GA review was not thorough, and missed a large amount of textual plagiarism (see the talk page and the most recent archive). It's got to the point that the only parts of the article that I'm convinced are clean are the [[WP:QUOTEFARM|awkwardly large volume of direct quotations]]. The original nominator and other contributors have been reluctant do the heavy lifting of sweeping the article of this plagiarism. I don't think there's anything for it at this point but GAR. [[User:Hijiri88|Hijiri 88]] (<small>[[User talk:Hijiri88|聖]][[Special:Contributions/Hijiri88|やや]]</small>) 13:01, 5 April 2019 (UTC) |
||
:: '''Delist''' given the lack of care. There has been no discussion on the article talk page and only minor adjustments made to the article. I recommend closing this as a delist considering it has been going on for almost 2 months without a single response. {{re|Hijiri88}} |
|||
Revision as of 15:42, 26 May 2019
- Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • • Most recent review
- Result pending
The original GA review was not thorough, and missed a large amount of textual plagiarism (see the talk page and the most recent archive). It's got to the point that the only parts of the article that I'm convinced are clean are the awkwardly large volume of direct quotations. The original nominator and other contributors have been reluctant do the heavy lifting of sweeping the article of this plagiarism. I don't think there's anything for it at this point but GAR. Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 13:01, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
- Delist given the lack of care. There has been no discussion on the article talk page and only minor adjustments made to the article. I recommend closing this as a delist considering it has been going on for almost 2 months without a single response. @Hijiri88: