Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Volcanic ash/1

Volcanic ash[edit]

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch article reassessment page • GAN review not found

Result: Keep (t · c) buidhe 18:01, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Over half the article is a long and very detailed discussion of the impact of volcanic ash on human communities, with almost no supporting inline citations (criteria 2b and 3b). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kent G. Budge (talk • contribs)

Let me elaborate a little. The serious deficiency in inline citations in the Impact section means this article clearly no longer meets the GA criteria. However, as with any good article reassessment, the best possible outcome is that the deficiencies are addressed well enough to avoid delisting. I plan to invest some time over the next few days in finding the necessary supporting cites and heavily copyediting this section. I appreciate any assistance from other editors doing so. Listing this for a community review is a way to ensure that a section so heavily reworked is, in fact, restored to meeting GA criteria as judged by independent reviewers at the end of the process.--Kent G. Budge (talk) 03:43, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Finished a first pass on citations. --Kent G. Budge (talk) 04:58, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delist per nom. Uncited content is not acceptable in a GA. Hemiauchenia (talk) 23:10, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, issue appears to have been resolved. Hemiauchenia (talk) 21:40, 11 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Kent has done a fantastic job in cleaning up the article and adding citations! I think it has now been easily restored to GA status. Thanks so much for your efforts, Kent! — hike395 (talk) 04:45, 10 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]