Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Adem Jashari/1

Adem Jashari[edit]

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 • Watch article reassessment page • Most recent review

Result: Kept. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 19:29, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Significant NPOV issues and changes since article was reviewed 13yrs ago. // Timothy :: talk 23:31, 4 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please spell out the NPOV issues that you are concerned about. Thanks, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 03:17, 5 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Is there meant to be two reassessments going on at the same time? (Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Adem Jashari/2) I suggest that the second one (which no-one has commented on yet) gets deleted.Nigel Ish (talk) 10:29, 5 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Since the second nomination doesn't seem to be right, or even in existence, I've removed it from the talk page. Chiswick Chap (talk) 16:36, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It is quite un-obvious why this article should have been nominated, as it appears to be decently structured, neutrally written, and very fully cited to reliable sources. Unless there are pressing but non-obvious reasons (please state them), I'd !vote Speedy Keep. Chiswick Chap (talk) 16:38, 6 November 2023 (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.