Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Carbon/1
Appearance
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: Keep, all concerns has been addressed. Keres🌕Luna edits! 13:42, 25 May 2025 (UTC)
Lots of uncited statements, including entire paragraphs. Z1720 (talk) 16:42, 21 April 2025 (UTC)
- Wow the previous GAN had some serious issues. For example, the section about '... Although thermodynamically prone to oxidation, carbon resists oxidation more effectively than elements such as iron and copper, which are weaker reducing agents at room temperature.' got put in the review as uncited, but it never got resolved and passed anyways. Keres🌕Luna edits! 01:54, 23 April 2025 (UTC)
- It looks like the most egregious examples of missing references are in the Compounds and Applications sections. The "Precautions" section also seriously needs a hazard infobox and should be renamed to something else to reduce "how-to guide" implications. One more thing: there's no good reason for the levels of WP:SANDWICH going on under Applications. Though I can't dedicate much time to this until I finish other tasks (as Keresluna is probably well aware; sorry!!) -- Reconrabbit 18:02, 26 April 2025 (UTC)
- Still work being done, please hold. Keres🌕Luna edits! 22:45, 21 May 2025 (UTC)
- It looks like the most egregious examples of missing references are in the Compounds and Applications sections. The "Precautions" section also seriously needs a hazard infobox and should be renamed to something else to reduce "how-to guide" implications. One more thing: there's no good reason for the levels of WP:SANDWICH going on under Applications. Though I can't dedicate much time to this until I finish other tasks (as Keresluna is probably well aware; sorry!!) -- Reconrabbit 18:02, 26 April 2025 (UTC)
- @Z1720: All statements are referenced and all the concerns above are addressed. Keres🌕Luna edits! 02:14, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
- @Keresluna: I added some citation needed tags in places where I think citaions are also required. Z1720 (talk) 14:50, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
- One addressed. One removed as WP:CALC. Not sure how to reference the claim In German, Dutch and Danish, the names for carbon are Kohlenstoff, koolstof, and kulstof respectively, all literally meaning coal-substance. as Kohlen-stoff literally means Coal-substance in german and others similarly. Would this qualify has WP:OBV? Keres🌕Luna edits! 15:35, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
- @Keresluna: WP:OBV is an essay, just like WP:NOTBLUE is an essay: neither is Wikipedia policy and guidelines (they might "represent widespread norms" while "others only represent minority viewpoints") so instead WP:V needs to be used to decide if it needs to be verified. I do not speak German, Dutch, or Danish, so I would not be able to verify that the information in this sentence is correct: since this statement can be challenged, it should be cited in my opinion. Z1720 (talk) 20:08, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
- Statement removed. Keres🌕Luna edits! 21:29, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
- @Z1720: Added statement back with references. Keres🌕Luna edits! 21:46, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
- Statement removed. Keres🌕Luna edits! 21:29, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
- @Keresluna: WP:OBV is an essay, just like WP:NOTBLUE is an essay: neither is Wikipedia policy and guidelines (they might "represent widespread norms" while "others only represent minority viewpoints") so instead WP:V needs to be used to decide if it needs to be verified. I do not speak German, Dutch, or Danish, so I would not be able to verify that the information in this sentence is correct: since this statement can be challenged, it should be cited in my opinion. Z1720 (talk) 20:08, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
- One addressed. One removed as WP:CALC. Not sure how to reference the claim In German, Dutch and Danish, the names for carbon are Kohlenstoff, koolstof, and kulstof respectively, all literally meaning coal-substance. as Kohlen-stoff literally means Coal-substance in german and others similarly. Would this qualify has WP:OBV? Keres🌕Luna edits! 15:35, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
- @Keresluna: I added some citation needed tags in places where I think citaions are also required. Z1720 (talk) 14:50, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
Keep. Concerns have been resolved. Z1720 (talk) 01:57, 25 May 2025 (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.