Talk:Hurricane Barry (2019)/GA1
Latest comment: 4 years ago by BlueMoonset in topic GA Review
GA Review
editGA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Hurricane Noah (talk · contribs) 11:02, 23 June 2020 (UTC)
I have deleted my original review. Ella524 (talk) 13:34, 22 June 2020 (UTC)
Review reopened
editIn this case, a brand new Wikipedian opened this review on their first edit, and decided to pass it even though they were completely unable to judge the "Broad in its coverage" criterion. This only shows how unready they are to be a GA reviewer, and I have reopened the review so that a new reviewer can be found to redo the entire review. BlueMoonset (talk) 00:57, 22 June 2020 (UTC)
- BlueMoonset, the new user turned out to be the person who nominated the article for a GA review. They have been blocked and NOOBSKINSPAMMER was blocked for 3 days. Dreamy Jazz talk to me | my contributions 21:16, 22 June 2020 (UTC)
- I see plenty of issues with the article that need to be addressed... I will leave comments later today. NoahTalk 11:03, 23 June 2020 (UTC)
- Dreamy Jazz, thanks for letting me know. Hurricane Noah, as this was an out-of-process nomination by someone who had made no edits at all to the article when they first tried to nominate it on May 19 and succeeded on June 3 (if someone hasn't made significant edits prior, they have to consult with regular editors on the talk page prior to nominating, which was not done), and very minor edits since—and socked to try to pass it—I have reverted the nomination. There is no need to spend time on an article that, as you note, has plenty of issues. Indeed, I'd suggest deleting this page altogether, so it's available in the future for when editors have brought the article closer to the GA criteria and one is ready to do a genuine nomination. Thanks for being willing to take this on. BlueMoonset (talk) 13:28, 23 June 2020 (UTC)
- Actually, do we need to keep this page around since its edit history is the proof of the socking? If so, perhaps it should simply be archived. BlueMoonset (talk) 13:35, 23 June 2020 (UTC)
- I see plenty of issues with the article that need to be addressed... I will leave comments later today. NoahTalk 11:03, 23 June 2020 (UTC)