Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Arbroath/1

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch article reassessment page • Most recent review

Result: Issues fixed by Rupples, who is continuing to improve the article. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 10:33, 8 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A GA from 2009. There's some uncited statements that need to be cited. Onegreatjoke (talk) 18:23, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and this article also needs to be updated as well for the 2021 UK census as some sections are sourced to the previous ones. Onegreatjoke (talk) 00:17, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep GA status. I should say at the outset this is my first contribution to a GA reassessment discussion and I'm not entirely sure of the procedure. I formed my opinion by reading the article as it looked after being awarded GA status in 2009[1] alongside the current version.[2] I'm assuming the criteria for GA status is largely unchanged from 2009.

My overall impression is that the article has improved. Large sections of text have been rewritten to improve flow/readability. Additional relevant images have been included. Further encyclopedic content has been added with supporting inline references.

My criticisms are:

(i) Governance section needs to be updated.

(ii) Demography section needs updating

(iii) Notable people has a lack of referencing. Many of the entries do not describe the person's relationship with Arbroath.

(iv) House price stats in Economy section outdated. Haven't come across this in other articles on towns/villages. Maybe better scrubbed as it requires constant updating.

(v) Public services has excessive detail re the list of recyclable materials.

However, I think the shortfalls can be overcome without much difficulty. Indeed, I'm unsure whether failing to update statistics invalidates GA status so long as the material is supported with reliable, sources at the time of writing.WP:GACR Rupples (talk) 00:44, 24 January 2023 (UTC) (signed late after reminder) (Edit: added diffs for versions compared) Rupples (talk) 08:57, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Rupples please remember to sign your talk page comments. If you are willing to find and include sources, that would be great. Failing to update statistics after a reasonable time does invalidate GA status; however, as the most recent census only took place in March 2022, I wouldn't have nominated the article this early. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 00:40, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]