Talk:Singapore Airlines/GA3

GA Review

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

Reviewer: SounderBruce (talk · contribs) 07:00, 20 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid I will have to quick fail this GAN, as the article is far away from meeting GA standards. See the comments below:

Failed "good article" nomination

This article has failed its Good article nomination. This is how the article, as of February 20, 2020, compares against the six good article criteria:

1. Well written?: The article mixes promotional language and awkward, un-cohesive prose that is hard to read.

2. Verifiable?: Many paragraphs lack inline citations, and the citations used elsewhere are heavily reliant on primary sources from the airline themselves or substandard sources like blogs and semi-clickbait news websites.

3. Broad in coverage?: The history section has been split away, but a summary-style section has not be re-added to the parent article.

4. Neutral point of view?: As stated above, this goes uncomfortably into promotional territory.

5. Stable?: Recent spam issues aside, this article seems to attract regular vandalism and would need to be under protection.

6. Images?: Heavy on the planes, but not much for the headquarters, flight branding, or facilities in general.

When these issues are addressed, the article can be renominated. If you feel that this review is in error, feel free to have it reassessed. Thank you for your work so far.— Sounder Bruce 07:00, 20 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]