Talk:Spanish flu/GA1

GA Reassessment[edit]

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
This article, listed as GA in April 2006, failed GA Reassessment for the following reasons:

The article fails 2 (b) in that it fails to provide in-line citations from reliable sources for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged. The article contains numerous {{citation needed}} tags throughout. Further, there is a long list of "Notable fatalities" that is largely uncited.
The article fails 3 (broad in its coverage) in that there is a {{globalize}} tag under the "Cultural impact" section.
Additionally, the article has a {{Cleanup-restructure|date=October 2008}} that has not been addressed of this date. The talk page reflects some disagreement over content, naming, and the accuracy of figures give.
Therefore the article will be delisted as GA if problems are not remedied.

—Mattisse (Talk) 18:47, 14 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Agree this should not at this point be a GA.--Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 22:21, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Agree it should be delisted - entire paragraphs are unreferenced, and reference formatting is inconsistent. Parrot of Doom (talk) 22:18, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There are no {{citation needed}} tags any more. It looks like a good article to me. Shreevatsa (talk) 04:20, 12 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The article is much improved. However, there is still a {{clarifyme}} tag and a request for a more {{global}} point of view for the cultural impact section, which seems important since this flu was a global pandemic. Also the list of "Notable fatalities" and "Notable survivors" is unavoidable arbitrary and should be removed. Also, the references need to be checked. For example, http://www.avian-bird-flu.info/spanishfluepidemic1918.html goes to a flu vacine sales sites. And http://www.dmacdigest.com/flu1918.html (used repeadedly) list the Spanish wikipedia as one of its sources. These are not reliable sources. Regards, —Mattisse (Talk) 20:49, 12 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I will close this as undecided so Keep and open a community GAR regarding the the list of "Notable fatalities" and "Notable survivors". Regards, —Mattisse (Talk) 23:55, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, this article would be a Keep with no GAR if you remedy the following complaint. The article with the improved references is fine except for the lists of "Notable fatalities" and "Notable survivors". I believe the lists should be removed because they are an arbitrary selection from worldwide cases, the two lists are too long, some names on the list are not referenced, and some names are redlinked so they are not notable enough to have articles. Would you consider removing the lists? Regards, —Mattisse (Talk) 14:36, 14 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]