DOSEN PROFIL LENGKAP

Shortcuts WP:GA?WP:GA? WP:GACRWP:GACR WP:WIAGAWP:WIAGA The good article criteria are the six standards by which a good article nomination (GAN) may be...

GAR in 2008. Unfortunately, I do not think this article meets modern WP:GACR standards and will need significant amounts of work in order to retain its...

additional references (GACR 2), tone may be inapproprate (possibly GACR 4), needs to be expanded (GACR 3), and needs cleanup and a copyedit (GACR 1). —97198 talk...

promotion has a very large amount of uncited text, which is problematic with WP:GACR #2. It needs either improvement or delisting. Hog Farm Talk 01:23, 4 April...

self-published/primary/questionable sources, which would fail criteria 2 of the GACR. Spinixster (chat!) 08:05, 23 October 2023 (UTC) Since someone has asked...

MaityTalkContribs Hello Markv68 and welcome! =) Please read WP:GACN and WP:GACR. After you are done, just post an update here. --Ankit MaityTalkContribs...

personal life sections. I believe the article now meets the criteria at WP:GACR. Thanks, Mattythewhite (talk) 21:15, 27 December 2015 (UTC) Great work Mattythewhite...

been a quick fail, in large part due to the lack of inline sourcing per WP:GACR#2b. A lot of these claims go far beyond basic facts and require inline citations...

is really quite horrible, and I don't believe this passes criterion 1 of GACR. On top of poor grammar throughout, the article also suffers from overquotation...

article has received from the subject's "fans" in recent times. In terms of WP:GACR, I think #1 is okay on the whole although a reviewer would certainly list...

unreliable and unsourced information, which fails GA2a and GA2b of the WP:GACR. In addition, the song sample and music video screenshot fails GA6a and GA6b...

of good articles (GAs) that may no longer meet the good article criteria (GACR). GAs are held to the current standards regardless of when they were promoted...

a hard time reaching GA. I don't think it satisfied GA criteria 3.a. WP:GACR. I would think there should be some coverage on Japanese websites like 4gamer...

see many unsourced sections and paragraphs in the article, thus failing WP:GACR criteria 2. sovereign°sentinel (contribs) 12:56, 8 September 2015 (UTC) I...

video "Synopsis" section has no inline citations and one link to a video. WP:GACR #2 includes "Verifiable with no original research". —Ojorojo (talk) 14:00...

its caption is appropriate. Therefore, the article complies with GACR#6. Where in GACR does it even mention an infobox? As with the entire article, the...

unsourced or badly sourced information (IMDB, etc) which fails criteria 2 of the GACR. Additionally, there may be some WP:CRUFT. Spinixster (chat!) 01:24, 6 November...

Also we need more info, specifically how it fails one or more of the WP:GACR before we can delist. The age of the status or nominator being banned is...

well-cited to avoid WP:OR. If you're intending to go for GA, I'd check the WP:GACR page. The presentation of the critical responses, with collapsible boxes...

GACR#2 (verification) because several citations are needed and that could result in an immediate WP:GAFAIL at GAN. A GA review would be okay on GACR#1a...

especially in the Broadcast format section, which would fail criteria 2 of the GACR. Spinixster (chat!) 09:22, 17 October 2023 (UTC) The discussion above is...

possibly unreliable sources, which means this article fails criteria 2 of the GACR. Spinixster (chat!) 03:33, 15 November 2023 (UTC) The discussion above is...

unsourced or badly sourced information (IMDB, etc) which fails criteria 2 of the GACR. Additionally, there may be some WP:CRUFT. Spinixster (chat!) 01:56, 12 November...

updated sufficiently since its last reassessment in 2016, meaning it fails WP:GACR criterion 3a). ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 21:57, 6 December 2023 (UTC)...

December 2025 (UTC) tagged since 2023. fails the neutral criteria of the gacr. ltbdl (love) 13:00, 8 December 2025 (UTC) The discussion above is closed...

proper GA review. Questions have been raised as to whether the article passes GACR#2. — Bilorv(talk)(c)(e) 10:27, 23 January 2016 (UTC) This is a BLP promoted...

happy to open it again so they can work on it with the aim of meeting the WP:GACR. Good luck. AIRcorn (talk) 08:23, 25 November 2019 (UTC) Comment: I think...

GA criteria. GA2 failed for two main reasons. First, a key condition of GACR#1 is "understandable to an appropriately broad audience" and the article...

modern good article criteria. Entire paragraphs are unsourced, failing WP:GACR #2 "Verifiable with no original research". For example, most of the "Algonquin...

template states at the top). The usage of maintenance templates goes against WP:GACR. For instance, "AngryBirdsNest" is used as a reference a lot, which is often...

article because I do not believe it still qualifies for GA status under WP:GACR. There are {{fact}} tags remaining on the page and entire sections (such...

instances of failed verification. Thus, this article no longer meets WP:GACR criterion 2, namely that the page is verifiable with no original research...

reflecting similar points. The Bibliography seems out of date, but not a GACR issue. Keep if lead/body are brought into alignment. CMD (talk) 02:58, 6...

sourced information (IMDB, Getty Images, etc) which fails criteria 2 of the GACR. Spinixster (chat!) 13:01, 20 October 2023 (UTC) Delist. Questionable sources...

Wikipedia. As you might know, GAs are reviewed against six criteria (WP:GACR). I think this article is well on its way. The areas I see being a problem...

you don't know, good articles are reviewed against six criteria here (WP:GACR) Hope that this helps. Let me know if you have any questions. Cheers --Tom...

specifically in the article that you are concerned about related to the WP:GACR. I will give it a quick look through for any obvious failings. AIRcorn (talk)...

and not enough detail on its background, reception, and legacy. Thus, [[WP:GACR|GA criteria 2b) and 3b) are not met. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 21:38,...

(UTC) This 2007 listing that was last reviewed in the 2009 sweeps fails GACR 2a, having multiple unsourced areas and a largely unsourced crufty "pop culture"...

outstanding tags and nothing on the talk page to suggest it fails any WP:GACR. As there is no real interest from the community an individual reassessment...

(UTC) A few notes: I don't see any NPOV issues. Layout looks good. As far as GACR goes, the article appears to be sufficiently broad in scope and in depth...

listing has some unsourced statements, which would fail criteria 2 of the GACR. There may also be some prose issues, but I am not experienced with weather-related...

player's career, in the last year and as a result now fails multiple WP:GACR. Omitting the 2024 WS championship is not Verifiable to reliable secondary...

went through and added two dozen more. This clearly falls well short of WP:GACR and if in an initial review would certainly qualify for WP:QF RoySmith (talk)...

frequent paragraph breaks. As it stands, it is not well-written and fails GACR#1. Jack (talk) 00:39, 20 November 2025 (UTC) The discussion above is closed...

passed the page in its current state because of the quality of the prose (WP:GACR point 1). For instance: He also made improvements to guns, cylindro-conoidal...

questionable sources and has many unsourced bits, which fails criteria 2 of the GACR. Spinixster (chat!) 01:35, 17 March 2024 (UTC) Looking at the article organization...

(UTC) Z1720, the first sentence of your rationale is not relevant to the GACR. Regarding recent updates, are there sources available? ~~ AirshipJungleman29...

because I am concerned this article was not fully evaluated against the GACR. The nomination was passed within an hour after just one minor wording tweak...

the criteria of a good article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:GACR#Criteria Here is the table of articles and which discussion section they...

Oppose and close No clear issues and images are optional, according to WP:GACR. Nova Crystallis (Talk) 18:41, 15 October 2018 (UTC) Oppose + Close The only...

paraphrased, but I don't know if they're at the "absolutely needing it to fit GACR" point rather than the "it would be a good idea" point, so possibly worth...

sources are going to be fairly comprehensive about Fisher's life, so a WP:GACR #3a concern for breadth would require specific missing information and the...

essentially an article with an embedded list in all but name), but for failing GACR§3. Would support moving to Counties of Delaware, although I'd understand...

listing. There is significant uncited text, which is problematic per WP:GACR #2b, and the notable cases section is largely sourced only to the cases section...

Wikipediocracy. I believe that the article in its current state fails WP:GACR criteria 1a, 2b, 2c, 3a, 3b, and 4. sst✈(discuss) 04:26, 24 November 2015...

page • Most recent review Result: Keep. Article meets all criteria of WP:GACR. (honestly, it's pretty close to FA standard). ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk)...

com and Gfwl.com, well keep them both! What is stopping you? In fact, WP:GACR says an article must be complete. No one has said "one link to rule them...

25 July 2016 (UTC) Keep Substantial part of Czech research is funded via GACR. Schlosser67 provided some refrences, I will look for another.Pavlor (talk)...

indiscriminate laundry list of incidents of usage is problematic with respect to WP:GACR #3(b). —David Eppstein (talk) 01:15, 6 June 2023 (UTC) I wonder. The list...

methods that are available, I think maybe problematic with respect to WP:GACR#3b (going into excessive detail). —David Eppstein (talk) 02:07, 1 April 2024...

your mind!) 18:51, 28 April 2017 (UTC) Disambiguate to WP:STYLEVAR or WP:GACR#The six good article criteria. In principle I agree with Uncle Ed - I was...

to have been high-profile so far. I believe the broadness criteria of WP:GACR is met and I don't think it's useful to expect FAC-level comprehensiveness...

Thanks, NicoBolso (talk) 23:01, 28 April 2020 (UTC) Comments along the WP:GACR 1: No obvious issues surrounding spelling and grammar. However, the article...

architecture/layout of the shops. This alone should have been a quick fail under WP:GACR criterion 3a, not to mention the sourcing and close paraphrasing issues mentioned...

and fail to add information that our own prose could. As we all know, WP:GACR requires compliance with the manual of style, and MOS:QUOTE discourages excessive...

WP:UNIGUIDE, which is just an essay.) But still, the verifiability issues are WP:GACR failures, and they haven't been remedied in the ~half-year this GAR has been...

confusing. I am wondering if we would be better to simply redirect WT:GA, WT:GACR, WT:GAR and other associated talk pages to WT:GAN so everything is centralised...

glaring lot of uncited paragraphs, which fails criteria 2 of the Wikipedia:GACR criteria. Another is that there is clearly much more that could be written...

meet the good article criteria. GARs whose rationale does not include the GACR may be speedily closed." The nominator did not specify or provide examples...

Individual reassessments are quite easy, just conduct a review against the WP:GACR, notify editors and Wikiprojects that might be interested and wait for responses...

need expansion. Being broad does not mean comprehensive (see note 6 at WP:GACR) and nothing is jumping out at me at the moment, except maybe the Post-premiership...

. debatable. I think the most relevant part of the criteria there is WP:GACR#3: It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail. Rollinginhisgrave...

the material is supported with reliable, sources at the time of writing.WP:GACR Rupples (talk) 00:44, 24 January 2023 (UTC) (signed late after reminder)...

musicians or movie star to have a wikipedia page.It meets every criteria for WP:GACR KEEP this page.- Jimmy Smith Delete - there do not appear to be independent...

expect that the section on cultural depictions should be written in prose: WP:GACR#1b requires compliance with MOS:EMBED, which among other things suggests...

like they belong to one of the categories of statements for which the WP:GACR require inline citations. You clearly have a lot of expertise on this topic...

Hi @Generalissima I did the GA review. I tried to hew strictly to the WP:GACR, which only require that it "addresses the main aspects of the topic", which...

substantially expanded, the article fails the WP:NPOV requirements in WP:GACR#4 — BillHPike (talk, contribs) 19:52, 30 September 2018 (UTC) ‘Sex discrimination’...

MaityTalkContribs Hello Rainbow Shifter and welcome! =) Please read WP:GACN and WP:GACR. After you are done, just post an update here. --Ankit MaityTalkContribs...

sources". Note that while WP:FACR requires high-quality reliable sources, WP:GACR only requires reliable sources. This means that sources which were acceptable...

2009 GA promotion contains enough uncited text that it is an issue with WP:GACR. Hog Farm Talk 01:22, 21 September 2025 (UTC) nb: First time doing a GAN/assessment...

recent review Result: Speedy keep, GAR rationale badly misunderstands the GACR. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 02:42, 21 January 2024 (UTC) Most of the material in the lead...

(T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 19:42, 5 November 2010 (UTC) Comment: I failed this on WP:GACR#3a as the article really contains very little information that gives a broad...

question of detail, the article seems to cover "the main points" as required by GACR; comparison with the massive topic of Pi is inapposite, in the manner of...

clearly much work and development needed here, it fails criteria 3 of WP:GACR, see the associated article Norton Internet Security to get an idea of the...

different in that any editor can comment on whether an article meets the WP:GACR and then someone assesses the consensus of the discussion and based on that...

means that the article is not stable, so it by definition does not meet WP:GACR. VMS Mosaic (talk) 09:40, 2 November 2013 (UTC) The stability is requiered...

someone else demonstrate everything is ok rather than point to a specific GACR issue. Maybe nominators get a sense of doing something when it's really nothing...

touched upon in the "History" section, but otherwise this may not meet WP:GACR's broadness criterion. – Epicgenius (talk) 15:37, 11 May 2025 (UTC) Delist...

here are a good starting point. The actual GA criteria can be found at WP:GACR. Because the review left by Doc James seems like a good skeleton of a review...

the lead. I'd say that this is necessary for the sake of broadness, per WP:GACR#3. Finally, the references which are currently in the article could use some...

(What did I screw up now?) 06:19, 10 August 2023 (UTC) Keep Note 6 on WP:GACR says "The presence of media is not a requirement." so I don't think that's...

against the sources he cited in the article to check the WP:V criterion of WP:GACR. I apologize for this oversight and will endeavor to check for general notability...

sourced elsewhere in the article, it is redundant and needs to be removed per GACR#3b 2) obvious recentism in the history section. The Catholic Church has a...

and are repeated. This is strange and I think this would make it fail WP:GACR 2b. Neuroxic (talk) 13:15, 25 May 2023 (UTC) Ah. You see, those are to the...

(see MOS:QUOTE). This has the effect of making the prose difficult to read (GACR#1a). In cases where direct quotes are used, they should generally have in-text...

(talk) 13:30, 18 March 2020 (UTC) Hi, leaving some comments with the WP:GACR in mind. 1a: On the whole, the prose is well-written. Nothing egregious sticks...

GamerPro64 06:53, 28 January 2025 (UTC) Good articles need to pass 6 criteria (WP:GACR), so I'll comment based on those 6 criteria. Consider making the lead a bit...

nomination. Therefore, as these issues effect Criteria #2 & Criteria #4 of WP:GACR, I am opening up this article to community reassessment.--RightCowLeftCoast...

regardless of the topic. Norse mythology has no more of a carve-out from GACR or GNG than anything else. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 04:19, 10 June 2024 (UTC) From your...

significantly from the reviewed version. I question whether this takes away from WP:GACR point 3 as it reduces the breadth of coverage, especially when the vehicle...

from WP:OR, WP:UNSOURCED claims and claims made by non-WP:RS, failing WP:GACR no. #2. This has been the situation since January 2008, when it was promoted...

January 2026 (UTC) I will note that WP:Close paraphrasing is covered by WP:GACR 2d: it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism (see further information...

Consider the criteria for Good Article, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:GACR#Criteria, and evaluate where this piece hits or misses the mark in answering...

forum to continue old disputes. All we care about is how it fails the WP:GACR. If there are concerns with editors behaviour then they need to go to another...

January 2025 (UTC) As far as I can tell, the nominator is complaining about GACR 2b in the first two paragraph of the Climate section referring to missing...

standards of Good Articles, given here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:GACR#Criteria. How do I get a draft of the assignment from my partners so I can...

obviously want decent reviews the main issue is whether the article meets the WP:GACR. If it doesn't then lets just reassess it. Maybe if it had only just been...

for a talk page discussion, and not something that precludes passing on GACR 3a, no? The compromise is that the article mentions the topic and that delving...

sources (Scout Xing, The Scouting Pages) do not appear to be RS. Fails WP:GACR 2b. This seems to have met the 2008 GA criteria, but more is expected, and...

-- Eraserhead1 <talk> 22:42, 28 February 2010 (UTC) PS Certainly the WP:GACR will need to be checked to make sure this article meets those criteria. --...

2021 (UTC) That would be helpful indeed. It would also help you meet WP:GACR #6 (or, at least, avoid a debate with your reviewer about it). I would not...

2009 (UTC) In defense of this article retaining its GA status: First, WP:GACR does not explicitly address article size. Item #3b does advocate use of WP:Summary...

be a Good article unless more sourcing is found, since it would fail WP:GACR 2 and 3, as some of the sources that this article heavily relies on are primary...

serious problems; after a large number of edits, I was able to get it to GACR standard. The former was the by far largest article I created (no kidding)...

passerby, I think those points are largely unhelpful in terms of both the GACR and what readers are interested in when they read these articles. Of course...

FAC page. I decided to come here instead of trying my luck there. As for GACR, if you want to use those within this review, I'll be happy with that. I've...

Consider the criteria for Good Article, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:GACR#Criteria, and evaluate where this piece hits or misses the mark in answering...

thorough review of an article of this size, a reviewer would find no WP:GACR violations, and not even have any questions, comments, or suggestions. The...

(talk) 22:38, 21 March 2024 (UTC) The article fails to meet WP:NPOV (WP:GACR #4), specifically WP:AESTHETIC. For example, the second paragraph begins...

WP:USERGEN source which has not been addressed in over 2 years. According to WP:GACR, there are a significant number of requirements which had not been thoroughly...

6 March 2011 (UTC) I agree with the other comments, but note that the WP:GACR makes no mention of specific formatting of in-line citations other than those...

relevant to me. Sergecross73 msg me 00:19, 21 September 2013 (UTC) And yet WP:GACR makes no reference whatsoever to notability - an article can fail and still...

of the above-noted necessary changes are made, in order to comply with WP:GACR. ɱ (talk) · vbm · coi) 19:51, 13 April 2018 (UTC) I believe the article complies;...

words. Z1720 (talk) 23:44, 15 November 2024 (UTC) For me, these are not GACR-relevant issues which should not hold up the closing of the GAR, but as I'm...

has many incoming links and is still used even after 3.5 years. We have WP:GACR and WP:WIAGA for the criteria, so the main problem with WP:GAC is that it...

it is not clear from your statement how the article does not meet the WP:GACR. None of the above statements are "direct quotations, statistics, published...

"Biography" h2 just means that proper sectioning is missing, which means that WP:GACR#1b isn't fulfilled. "Controversy" sections have been deprecated; see WP:CSECTION...

then the absence of a citation is not grounds for de-listing, since the GACR do not require one citation per sentence), a ==Home media== section that...

nominator. Article has a significant amount of plagiarism/copyvios, failing GACR 2d. 🌙Eclipse (talk) (contribs) 14:03, 30 April 2024 (UTC) The discussion...

more concise. Z1720 (talk) 23:47, 17 January 2025 (UTC) As I understand WP:GACR, I think this fails each of points 1a, 1b, 2b, and 3b. I would demote it...

in "Early life" section, but the actual caption is different. So per WP:GACR, Is this good or not? Hetika (talk) 16:23, 25 April 2015 (UTC) Yes this is...

delisted (t · c) buidhe 09:12, 14 March 2022 (UTC) Per the criteria at WP:GACR, a Good Article should be well-written, verifiable with no original research...

3 December 2011 (UTC) Moreover, they will likely fail on account of WP:GACR#5 if there is no consensus as to where the information should be, whether...

explanations from more experienced copyright patrollers, but I take the GACR seriously and feel an obligation to raise this in some forum. Zzz plant (talk)...

Consider the criteria for Good Article, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:GACR#Criteria/  , and evaluate where this piece hits or misses the mark in answering...

duplicate here), etc. With respect, we are very far from falling foul of either GACR Neutrality or Breadth criteria here: the article gives what many readers...

this article currently meets the broadness criteria as defined by the WP:GACR AIRcorn (talk) 15:22, 29 May 2013 (UTC) I am disputing the recent downgrade...

fact/source check were it to go to GAN today. I think it quick-fails on WP:GACR 1 and 3. Alyo (chat·edits) 16:43, 11 February 2022 (UTC) I didn't want to...

re-statement of the first of the six Good Article criteria (listed in full at WP:GACR, is that the article be well-written and that it comply with Manual of Style...

Consider the criteria for Good Article, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:GACR#Criteria/  , and evaluate where this piece hits or misses the mark in answering...

"unnecessary detail". This is specifically called out in the explanatory note to WP:GACR: The "broad in its coverage" criterion is significantly weaker than the "comprehensiveness"...

declined to provide a reason for voting Keep)—essentially, that it met WP:GACR#2 (albeit perhaps not that rigorously, because AfD has lower standards than...

game. JOEBRO64 15:39, 16 June 2021 (UTC) Delist per imminent failing of WP:GACR #3 and #5. Also oppose any split, as this is presumably the same game. --MuZemike...

in an image caption per MOS:CAPSUCCINCT (although, it's not clear that WP:GACR actually requires that). This by itself isn't enough to disqualify the ariticle...

on the opinions of two editors, and even experienced reviewers apply the GACR differently (broadness especially, in my experience). I don't think a reassessment...

reassessment do you have an opinion on whether this article meets the WP:GACR? Also do you have any evidence that this is a bad faith nomination? AIRcorn (talk)...

subconsciously). You could argue that this already exists in the penumbra of WP:GACR between "prose is clear and concise" and "stays focused on the topic without...

doesn't have to be that good. It just has to meet the criteria set out in WP:GACR. There are many GA articles that I would class as quite poor, but things...

dispute on a Good Article, then the GA needs to be delisted as it now fails WP:GACR#5 as it is no longer stable and changes significantly due to a content dispute...

this magazine that Rue Morgue. is notable. Tmproving it according to WP:GACR standards is the best way to do this.E.M.Gregory (talk) 10:14, 28 February...

here. My general impression however is that the sourcing isn't up to WP:GACR standards. A few minor details here or there would be fine, but this is more...

Consider the criteria for Good Article, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:GACR#Criteria/  , and evaluate where this piece hits or misses the mark in answering...

removed from the article as well, I do not think the article will meet WP:GACR criterion 3a (i.e. the coverage would no longer be broad). – Epicgenius (talk)...

address the criteria appropriately. Specifically, I think this article fails GACR 3, as it is not sufficiently broad in its coverage and leaves out several...

accept this as is, then we seriously need to rescind FACR 1. (e), as well as GACR 5 (both of which have to pertain to stability. –MuZemike 07:07, 5 August...

article on his user talk page that meets, or comes close to meeting, WP:GACR.  Sandstein  18:51, 7 December 2009 (UTC) Thank you. A Stop at Willoughby...

a pretty strange rationale that does not actually address any of the WP:GACR criteria. The article was probably not ready for a GA status (and the editor...

edit, of a page not edited since 2008. SMR shows no understanding of the GACR when making an unceasing list of demands coupled with his extensive concurrent...

are reasonably referenced but found a few instances for tagging. From WP:GACR, which includes WP:CAPTION and WP:IMAGE RELEVANCE, why don't you try giving...

the article fails to address one of the main aspects of the topic (see WP:GACR). An infobox is not required by policy, but recognition of an article as...

never gets done. 173.228.123.121 (talk) 06:38, 6 December 2017 (UTC) WP:GACR: "Either parenthetical references or footnotes can be used for in-line citations...

longstanding opinion of most GA editors. That is why it is not mentioned at the WP:GACR page. Also see the top of the WP:GAR page ("compliance with 90% of the Manual...

require access-dates, however they are formatted. Bare urls do not meet the GACR. CMD (talk) 12:09, 11 February 2023 (UTC) I believe you, but this rule appears...

image (unless it is impossible to obtain one)." The explanatory footnote for GACR#6 specifically says "The presence of media is not a requirement." Eddie891...

reviewers and in no way are part of the criteria, but the wording of the WP:GACR is sufficient. AIRcorn (talk) 08:23, 10 August 2013 (UTC) It says "if copyright...

itself needs to be smoothed out a little bit. The article basically meets WP:GACR but needs work before reaching featured article quality. —Preceding unsigned...

Consider the criteria for Good Article, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:GACR#Criteria/  , and evaluate where this piece hits or misses the mark in answering...

WP:OWN WP:NPOV, specifically WP:SUBJECTIVE and WP:DUE WP:EDITWAR WP:AGF WP:GACR WP:BITE Essays: WP:COMPETENCE WP:IDIDNTHEARTHAT (Provide diffs of the comments...

quotes, and tables, this article clearly violates criterion 3b) of the GACR. To remain a GA, this article needs to undergo a large amount of cleanup...

(talk) 03:20, 13 February 2025 (UTC) Not sure that concern is not outwith the GACR as there isn't a hard limit in policy. However: Have split out the Ideology;...

addressed. The article has potential for expansion, but currently meets the WP:GACR. AIRcorn (talk) 00:15, 4 March 2013 (UTC) While being respectful of the previous...

There are community-wide processes for GAs (including WP:GAN, WP:GAR, WP:GACR, WP:GAPQ and WP:WPGA) and FAs (including WP:FAC, WP:FAR, WP:FARC, WP:FACR...

hopefully help move articles closer to FA status. Now, looking at WP:FAC and WP:GACR it suggests our standards are: Clear prose, no issues with grammar and spelling...

Chap (talk) 14:26, 30 August 2024 (UTC) The copyediting is not beyond the GACR, it is very firmly in GACR1. CMD (talk) 14:35, 30 August 2024 (UTC) Done...

the criteria at WP:ACLASS, you'll find that they're not a superset of WP:GACR. Also, A/B/C grades are assigned by Wikiprojects. How they determine those...

reviewing the images to ensure that they meet the inclusion criteria (see WP:GACR & WP:FACR), so I believe this has been done. Believe me, I'm as much of a...

an opinion but it might not go far. @Calvin999: My comments are above. WP:GACR requires that the coverage "addresses the main aspects of the topic". The...

is not a requirement for GA status; archiving isn't even mentioned in WP:GACR. The only thing that the actual criteria require is that it be possible for...

ones that aren't re-used, but I think it's important to remember the WP:GACR do not include a criterion of "use the exact WP:CITEVAR that the reviewer...

coverage," but how much that is depends on the scope of the article. See WP:GACR. —teb728 t c 21:20, 3 January 2016 (UTC) Hi Xender Lourdes - article length...

Senie significantly compromises the article's broadness (criterion 3 of WP:GACR): Broad in its coverage; addresses the main aspects of the topic (significantly...

2008 (UTC) Endorse delisting. In the current state the article fails WP:GACR by a wide margin. It is significantly undereferenced including such potentially...

actually approaching GA/FA quality. You can review the GA criteria at WP:GACR as something to shoot for. --Izno (talk) 14:30, 1 May 2019 (UTC) Coverage;...

outstanding tags and nothing on the talk page to suggest it fails any WP:GACR. As there is no real interest from the community an individual reassessment...

believe that it is in line with my expectations for either 3a and 3b in the GACR under the topic stated in the given title. To meet this concern, I'd recommend...

removed the nomination because it did not meet the GA criteria. Please read WP:GACR before nominating an article as a GA. ― Kaleeb18TalkCaleb 03:18, 9 February...

relevant to me. Sergecross73 msg me 00:19, 21 September 2013 (UTC) And yet WP:GACR makes no reference whatsoever to notability - an article can fail and still...

an opinion but it might not go far. @Calvin999: My comments are above. WP:GACR requires that the coverage "addresses the main aspects of the topic". The...

25 July 2016 (UTC) Keep Substantial part of Czech research is funded via GACR. Schlosser67 provided some refrences, I will look for another.Pavlor (talk)...

think the "understandable to an appropriately broad audience" part of WP:GACR's 1a is very important, and you provided some good feedback in that area,...

this magazine that Rue Morgue. is notable. Tmproving it according to WP:GACR standards is the best way to do this.E.M.Gregory (talk) 10:14, 28 February...

musicians or movie star to have a wikipedia page.It meets every criteria for WP:GACR KEEP this page.- Jimmy Smith Delete - there do not appear to be independent...

3 December 2011 (UTC) Moreover, they will likely fail on account of WP:GACR#5 if there is no consensus as to where the information should be, whether...

(UTC) WP:GACR is not even a guideline. It most certainly does not trump WP:NFCC. We must first abide by WP:NFCC, and THEN we can consider WP:GACR. The costume...

specifications and motivations behind their own product. Going through the GACR, 1 I feel is met, there are probably a couple errors but nothing that couldn't...

status. But note that Good Articles have no strict length requirement (WP:GACR), they merely need to cover the notability of the subject in appropriate...

history of Japan. Specifically, I believe that more work is needed in: WP:GACR #2 Verifiable with no original research and #3 Broad in its coverage. I believe...

promotion has a very large amount of uncited text, which is problematic with WP:GACR #2. It needs either improvement or delisting. Hog Farm Talk 01:23, 4 April...

think that citations for items with linked articles are essential: under WP:GACR, they are: criterion 2b has All content that could reasonably be challenged...

passerby, I think those points are largely unhelpful in terms of both the GACR and what readers are interested in when they read these articles. Of course...

24 October 2021 (UTC) I don't understand how this article could pass WP:GACR #2 since most of the factual information in the article (i.e. the "Work"...

(UTC) No, a GAR should be based solely on the six GA criteria outlined at WP:GACR. I will make an equal effort as I think this is one of the more impressive...

additional references (GACR 2), tone may be inapproprate (possibly GACR 4), needs to be expanded (GACR 3), and needs cleanup and a copyedit (GACR 1). —97198 talk...

Individual reassessments are quite easy, just conduct a review against the WP:GACR, notify editors and Wikiprojects that might be interested and wait for responses...

slipped through the cracks during the nomination process, as they fail WP:GACR, most notably, the refernce information (several of the references in these...

delisted (t · c) buidhe 09:12, 14 March 2022 (UTC) Per the criteria at WP:GACR, a Good Article should be well-written, verifiable with no original research...

of a WP:SEEALSO link which is not part of the WP:GACR. Even if See Also links were part of the WP:GACR, it has already been resolved. Yes, I am aware that...

longstanding opinion of most GA editors. That is why it is not mentioned at the WP:GACR page. Also see the top of the WP:GAR page ("compliance with 90% of the Manual...

quotes, and tables, this article clearly violates criterion 3b) of the GACR. To remain a GA, this article needs to undergo a large amount of cleanup...

2009 (UTC) In defense of this article retaining its GA status: First, WP:GACR does not explicitly address article size. Item #3b does advocate use of WP:Summary...

is really quite horrible, and I don't believe this passes criterion 1 of GACR. On top of poor grammar throughout, the article also suffers from overquotation...

for a talk page discussion, and not something that precludes passing on GACR 3a, no? The compromise is that the article mentions the topic and that delving...

of listing it at WP:GAN. Since you worked so hard on it, if it meets WP:GACR, it might get good article status. Thanks --Ushau97 talk 10:05, 28 March...

directly from the GACR page. Use ctrl+f to find it or click on footnote [1]. Cpotisch, you had half a dozen opportunities to read the GACR properly and yet...

need to remove it. If it's not reliable, then you need to remove it per GACR #2b, not just common sense. WhatamIdoing (talk) 22:34, 23 July 2014 (UTC)...

GAR in 2008. Unfortunately, I do not think this article meets modern WP:GACR standards and will need significant amounts of work in order to retain its...

specifically in the article that you are concerned about related to the WP:GACR. I will give it a quick look through for any obvious failings. AIRcorn (talk)...

2008 (UTC) Endorse delisting. In the current state the article fails WP:GACR by a wide margin. It is significantly undereferenced including such potentially...

GAR: The article is over 2000 words long and all 3 images have FURs. WP:GACR №6 refers to "images", plural, and WP:NFCCP №3a refers to "minimal number...

substantially expanded, the article fails the WP:NPOV requirements in WP:GACR#4 — BillHPike (talk, contribs) 19:52, 30 September 2018 (UTC) ‘Sex discrimination’...

, and Frozen topped box office in its sixth weekend of wide release. WP:GACR 1a stipulates that the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an...

Sirberus, as this article contains significant uncited material, many WP:GACR-relevant tags such as {{failed verification}}, {{clarification needed}} and...

authors) tend to include more details in your writing than you should. WP:GACR says it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail...

being "understandable to an appropriately broad audience", but that is in WP:GACR, and I assume that anything required by GA is also required by FA. RoySmith...

glaring lot of uncited paragraphs, which fails criteria 2 of the Wikipedia:GACR criteria. Another is that there is clearly much more that could be written...

addressed. The article has potential for expansion, but currently meets the WP:GACR. AIRcorn (talk) 00:15, 4 March 2013 (UTC) While being respectful of the previous...

6 March 2011 (UTC) I agree with the other comments, but note that the WP:GACR makes no mention of specific formatting of in-line citations other than those...

FAQ detailing locations. Have had very little response asking at the WP:GACR talk page. My gut says that the interview may be alright the location not...

proper GA review. Questions have been raised as to whether the article passes GACR#2. — Bilorv(talk)(c)(e) 10:27, 23 January 2016 (UTC) This is a BLP promoted...

then the absence of a citation is not grounds for de-listing, since the GACR do not require one citation per sentence), a ==Home media== section that...

(T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 19:42, 5 November 2010 (UTC) Comment: I failed this on WP:GACR#3a as the article really contains very little information that gives a broad...

doesn't have to be that good. It just has to meet the criteria set out in WP:GACR. There are many GA articles that I would class as quite poor, but things...

reassessment do you have an opinion on whether this article meets the WP:GACR? Also do you have any evidence that this is a bad faith nomination? AIRcorn (talk)...

meet the good article criteria. GARs whose rationale does not include the GACR may be speedily closed." The nominator did not specify or provide examples...

paraphrased, but I don't know if they're at the "absolutely needing it to fit GACR" point rather than the "it would be a good idea" point, so possibly worth...

believe that it is in line with my expectations for either 3a and 3b in the GACR under the topic stated in the given title. To meet this concern, I'd recommend...

of a WP:SEEALSO link which is not part of the WP:GACR. Even if See Also links were part of the WP:GACR, it has already been resolved. Yes, I am aware that...

on the opinions of two editors, and even experienced reviewers apply the GACR differently (broadness especially, in my experience). I don't think a reassessment...

sourced elsewhere in the article, it is redundant and needs to be removed per GACR#3b 2) obvious recentism in the history section. The Catholic Church has a...

address the criteria appropriately. Specifically, I think this article fails GACR 3, as it is not sufficiently broad in its coverage and leaves out several...

-- Eraserhead1 <talk> 22:42, 28 February 2010 (UTC) PS Certainly the WP:GACR will need to be checked to make sure this article meets those criteria. --...

(UTC) No, a GAR should be based solely on the six GA criteria outlined at WP:GACR. I will make an equal effort as I think this is one of the more impressive...

January 2025 (UTC) As far as I can tell, the nominator is complaining about GACR 2b in the first two paragraph of the Climate section referring to missing...

January 2026 (UTC) I will note that WP:Close paraphrasing is covered by WP:GACR 2d: it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism (see further information...

EF5 to rethink. All GA means is that one other editor thought you met the GACR for a particular article; it says nothing about one's broader grasp of PAGs...

frequent paragraph breaks. As it stands, it is not well-written and fails GACR#1. Jack (talk) 00:39, 20 November 2025 (UTC) The discussion above is closed...

the material is supported with reliable, sources at the time of writing.WP:GACR Rupples (talk) 00:44, 24 January 2023 (UTC) (signed late after reminder)...

re-statement of the first of the six Good Article criteria (listed in full at WP:GACR, is that the article be well-written and that it comply with Manual of Style...

recent review Result: Speedy keep, GAR rationale badly misunderstands the GACR. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 02:42, 21 January 2024 (UTC) Most of the material in the lead...

more concise. Z1720 (talk) 23:47, 17 January 2025 (UTC) As I understand WP:GACR, I think this fails each of points 1a, 1b, 2b, and 3b. I would demote it...

itself needs to be smoothed out a little bit. The article basically meets WP:GACR but needs work before reaching featured article quality. —Preceding unsigned...

indiscriminate laundry list of incidents of usage is problematic with respect to WP:GACR #3(b). —David Eppstein (talk) 01:15, 6 June 2023 (UTC) I wonder. The list...

clearly much work and development needed here, it fails criteria 3 of WP:GACR, see the associated article Norton Internet Security to get an idea of the...

are reasonably referenced but found a few instances for tagging. From WP:GACR, which includes WP:CAPTION and WP:IMAGE RELEVANCE, why don't you try giving...

template states at the top). The usage of maintenance templates goes against WP:GACR. For instance, "AngryBirdsNest" is used as a reference a lot, which is often...

duplicate here), etc. With respect, we are very far from falling foul of either GACR Neutrality or Breadth criteria here: the article gives what many readers...

needed to be established in the first place. The criteria to hit are the GACR. CMD (talk) 02:17, 26 October 2023 (UTC) By shifting goalposts I was specifically...

enough that the second review could be a tick-box exercise is flawed, as GACR violations could have been introduced between the first and second reviews...

reviewers should say things like "I find this section a bit confusing, and GACR 1a requires it to be understandable. Is this saying that the character accidentally...

"unnecessary detail". This is specifically called out in the explanatory note to WP:GACR: The "broad in its coverage" criterion is significantly weaker than the "comprehensiveness"...

paragraph must have a footnote marker at its exact end, differing from the GACR wording that every reasonably-sourced claim must be sourced anywhere before...

page • Most recent review Result: Keep. Article meets all criteria of WP:GACR. (honestly, it's pretty close to FA standard). ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk)...

sources are going to be fairly comprehensive about Fisher's life, so a WP:GACR #3a concern for breadth would require specific missing information and the...

Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:36, 3 June 2026 (UTC) You should also review WP:GACR for the GA criteria. toby in solidarity 18:05, 3 June 2026 (UTC) cough also...

be a Good article unless more sourcing is found, since it would fail WP:GACR 2 and 3, as some of the sources that this article heavily relies on are primary...

December 2025 (UTC) tagged since 2023. fails the neutral criteria of the gacr. ltbdl (love) 13:00, 8 December 2025 (UTC) The discussion above is closed...

directly supporting the material. Please see the terms of WP:GAFAIL within WP:GACR; also WP:GAN/I#R3 which says the reviewer must perform a sample source spot-check...

words. Z1720 (talk) 23:44, 15 November 2024 (UTC) For me, these are not GACR-relevant issues which should not hold up the closing of the GAR, but as I'm...

article ratings are subjective, There are literally objective criteria (WP:GACR, WP:FACR) that are used to evaluate articles for GA or FA status. So no,...

authors) tend to include more details in your writing than you should. WP:GACR says it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail...

against the sources he cited in the article to check the WP:V criterion of WP:GACR. I apologize for this oversight and will endeavor to check for general notability...

trivially spill out. A side note on "NPP is not GAN, and not even low-reading GACR, and not anything at all like a quality assessment process": I just patrolled...

detector to see what I'm talking about. (Edit - I would support changing WP:GACR criterion 3 - It has, or needs, cleanup banners that are unquestionably still...

status. But note that Good Articles have no strict length requirement (WP:GACR), they merely need to cover the notability of the subject in appropriate...

might help to have a look at the criteria and assessments for those - WP:GACR, WP:GAN, WP:FACR and WP:FAC respectively. I enjoy peeking in from time to...

Wikipedia. Please refer to Wikipedia:Good article criteria. The shortcut is WP:GACR. Cullen328 (talk) 20:15, 20 August 2023 (UTC) thank you! talk 2 pediaOS 20:47...

Further, many of the root issues here stem from misunderstandings of the GACR, which would directly affect reviews. Nominations may be another matter that...

citation formatting but that is not part of the criteria. See footnote 4 of WP:GACR. —David Eppstein (talk) 02:15, 11 January 2026 (UTC) I'm looking ahead to...

that they don't trust it for spelling and grammar, which seems the part of GACR that a predictive algorithm would be most easily able to do (I find it to...

being "understandable to an appropriately broad audience", but that is in WP:GACR, and I assume that anything required by GA is also required by FA. RoySmith...

quality assessment. For that WP:GAN would be the place, but I would check WP:GACR carefully before. Choucas0 🐦‍⬛⋅💬⋅📋 12:00, 16 April 2025 (UTC) I assessed...

reasons that involve one of three alleged issues, which I claimed were not WP:GACR at their talk page: The use of live feeds as citations. Vagueness and specificity...