Jump to content

Talk:Ralph Bakshi

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by ClueBot III (talk | contribs) at 23:57, 2 December 2009 (Archiving 1 discussion to Talk:Ralph Bakshi/Archive 1. (BOT)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Good articleRalph Bakshi has been listed as one of the good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
December 26, 2005Featured article candidateNot promoted
October 27, 2006Peer reviewReviewed
January 21, 2007WikiProject peer reviewReviewed
February 2, 2007Good article nomineeListed
February 1, 2008Featured article candidateNot promoted
February 9, 2008Featured article candidateNot promoted
December 20, 2008Featured article candidateNot promoted
January 13, 2009Featured article candidateNot promoted
February 24, 2009Featured article candidateNot promoted
March 8, 2009Peer reviewReviewed
May 16, 2009Featured article candidateNot promoted
June 28, 2009Good article reassessmentKept
August 16, 2009Featured article candidateNot promoted
November 24, 2009Featured article candidateNot promoted
Current status: Good article
WikiProject iconGuild of Copy Editors
WikiProject iconThis article was copy edited by MacMed, a member of the Guild of Copy Editors, on June 28, 2009.
Previous copyedits:
Note icon
This article was copy edited by Baffle_gab1978 on 25 May 2009.
Note icon
This article was copy edited by Drilnoth on November 30, 2008.

GA Reassessment

This discussion is transcluded from Talk:Ralph Bakshi/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the reassessment.

GA Sweeps: Kept

As part of the WikiProject Good Articles, we're doing Sweeps to go over all of the current GAs and see if they still meet the GA criteria. I went through the article and made various changes, please look them over. I believe the article currently meets the criteria and should remain listed as a Good Article. Altogether the article is well-written and is still in great shape after its passing in 2007. Continue to improve the article making sure all new information is properly sourced and neutral. It would be beneficial to update the access dates for all of the sources. If you have any questions, let me know on my talk page and I'll get back to you as soon as I can. I have updated the article history to reflect this review. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talkcontrib) 02:40, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]