Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Brian Halligan/1
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.
- Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • • Most recent review
- Result: Delist per consensus ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 22:18, 24 May 2023 (UTC)
A GA from 2011 that does not meet current standards. It has a heavy reliance on primary and non-independent sources, which may also be WP:SPS. The prose also has an odd mix of promotional tone and critical tone, rather than integrating all information in a more WP:NPOV appropriate style. CMD (talk) 12:17, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
- Most of the independent sources are related to the Daniel Lyons business, while most of the core bio uses non-independent sources. Wondering why there is not an article on the book, with that content covered there. Also considering the history of COI/socking at this article, the bio seems unlikely to be brought to GA status, and delisting is probably the best course (along with more eyes going forward). SandyGeorgia (Talk) 12:29, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
- Delist, sourcing is quite poor. Hog Farm Talk 18:13, 23 May 2023 (UTC)
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.