Talk:Go (game)/GA1

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

GA Reassessment

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
As part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles' Project quality task force, I am re-reviewing this article to ensure compliance with current good article criteria. I have determined that it doesn't meet criteria for the reasons outlined below and needs a bit of work if it is to retain its status.

The lead section needs to be condensed and reworked. It doesn't need five paragraphs, especially as some of these 'paragraphs' are merely one or two lines long.
There are numerous areas that need additional citations for verification; at the very least, a paragraph with content from one source needs one citation at the end of the paragraph.
Continuing with the above, some sections seem excessively stubby, and could do better if they were combined together and the one or two line orphans fleshed out into full paragraphs or merged. In particular, "#Detailed description" and "#Comparison of the scoring methods" should go back into "Scoring rules".
"Notation and recording games" is unreferenced.
The "In culture and science" section starts veering towards a trivia-ish "In popular culture" bend. You need to flesh out these disparate statements or cut them.
~~Why is there a massive divider in "Strategy" that cuts off the text? This needs to be fixed.~~

I am putting the article on hold for a week until these issues are addressed. Please keep me informed via this page. Thanks, Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 19:40, 25 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've fixed the display of the diagram in the "Strategy" section. PC78 (talk) 10:34, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Since the other issues addressed haven't been taken care of, I am delisting the article. It may be renominated at WP:GAN any time an editor feels it meets criteria. Please direct any comments to my talk page, as I don't watchlist these old reviews. Thanks, Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 18:20, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.