Talk:Paul Allen/GA1

GA Reassessment

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Responding to the {{GAR request}}. A quick look at the article shows that the prose is not up to standard. A lot of WP:Proseline, one sentence paragraphs, etc. A little worried it might be overly promotional. Half the article is under philanthropy. Nothing negative is presented, which may be justified. There is this, this, this, and this. None of it is bad, but it just makes me wonder. Also things like Luckily for Allen, he refused and the slightly excessive use of lists are not really encyclopedic. Overall I don't think it is terribly far away. A good copyedut, trim or split of the Philanthrophy section and a few other fixes and it might be alright. Maybe a bit of COI editing (which would explain some of this) given Jordanatvulcan is a major editor. AIRcorn (talk) 04:09, 18 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delisted per above. AIRcorn (talk) 10:09, 5 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]