Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Martin Luther King, Jr./1

Martin Luther King, Jr.

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

Result: Incorrect listing; nominator was looking for WP:GAN EyeSerene^talk 17:46, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I find this article to be one of considerable notability and very well written. I therefore seek a reassessment of the previous delisting. THE KC (talk) 23:24, 10 April 2008 (UTC).[reply]

Comment: I can find no evidence that this article was ever a Good Article, although it did fail a review back in January 2006 (according to the Article History). Obviously, if it was never listed, it can't have been delisted. It's possible that you meant to request a fresh assessment, but because it has been such a long time since its GA review, this page is not really the appropriate place to challenge that outcome. Instead, Martin Luther King, Jr. should be listed at WP:GAN so it can be reviewed under a completely new nomination. If I've misunderstood, or you need help with this, please let us know! EyeSerene^talk 20:07, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Alright then, sorry, article was mislabeled. THE KC (talk) 02:11, 12 April 2008 (UTC).[reply]

No problem! Like I said, if you want a hand with the nomination, drop me a note. EyeSerene^talk 11:13, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Personally, based on a one-minute review, I think the article is underlinked and poorly cited. It is not up to standard for a person of this importance who is easily sourced.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 07:27, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I agree, it's unlikely to pass in its current form. See WP:WIAGA (item 2b). EyeSerene^talk 09:03, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]