Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Zytglogge/1
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 • • Most recent review
- Result: Kept all cn tags have been addressed. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 19:46, 2 February 2023 (UTC)
Some unsourced content. I have contacted the original nominator, and if they are willing, the article's GA status will be secure. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 12:29, 24 January 2023 (UTC)
- I cannot identify the grounds for this request. "Some unsourced content" is exceedingly unspecific. In view of this discussion, I will address specific concerns that editors other than the nominator have. Sandstein 18:47, 2 February 2023 (UTC)
- @Femke, in the discussion linked to above you asked about the two {{cn}} tags. From context and content I assume that I took these statements from Bellwald (1983), but I don't have the physical book and checking it out from the library again would be too much of a hassle, so I've deleted these sentences and the tags. Sandstein 18:55, 2 February 2023 (UTC)
- Brilliant. Thanks. You can find out if they were cited at the moment of insertion with mw:Who Wrote That. Great gadget to avoid having to find sources back again. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 19:45, 2 February 2023 (UTC)
- @Femke, in the discussion linked to above you asked about the two {{cn}} tags. From context and content I assume that I took these statements from Bellwald (1983), but I don't have the physical book and checking it out from the library again would be too much of a hassle, so I've deleted these sentences and the tags. Sandstein 18:55, 2 February 2023 (UTC)
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.