Talk:Grimace Shake/GA2

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: Begocc (talk · contribs) 11:22, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Review voided and nomination placed back in the queue — Bilorv (talk) 21:59, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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.

WP:QUICKFAIL, Still a start class, issues from previous GA nomination slightly addressed. maybe could get reassessed as C, but a long shot from a good article. Most effort is still on the reception and controversy, but the lead is better and more balanced, it still needs expansion (as well as the rest of the page).— Preceding unsigned comment added by Begocc (talk • contribs) 11:26, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Begocc: May I close this nomination for you? TWOrantula^TM (enter the web) 18:08, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@TrademarkedTWOrantula: see User talk:Begocc#Grimace Shake quickfail. @Begocc and Arconning: would you be happy for this review to be voided and for the article to placed back in the Good Article Nominations queue (with its old timestamp) for somebody else to review? — Bilorv (talk) 17:16, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Did not see that. Whoops. TWOrantula^TM (enter the web) 22:21, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yea, just void this review. it was pretty bad anyway :/ Begocci (talk) 15:34, 5 February 2024 (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.