Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Pussy Riot/1

Pussy Riot

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) 12:13, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There is uncited text throughout the article. At over 10,000 words, WP:TOOBIG recommends that information be spun out. Is there information that can be summarised more effectively and moved to other articles? There is an orange "update needed" banner on top of the "Imprisonment" section that needs to be addressed. "Amnesty International concert and membership controversy" has a very large block quote that I do not think is necessary. Can this be summarised and removed? Lenta is used as a citation, which according to WP:RS/P is on the Wikipedia spam blacklist. These sources should be replaced. Z1720 (talk) 02:34, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Over 5,000 words (half the article) are devoted to PR's 2012 protest in the cathedral, their arrest, trial, sentencing and subsequent worldwide reactions. I'm wondering whether than can be spun out into a separate article and summarised far more briefly in the main article. Sionk (talk) 14:03, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That's clearly the right thing to do, yes. Chiswick Chap (talk) 21:37, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I've made the subsidiary article Pussy Riot 2012 trial, and replaced its text with a "main" link and summary. This has halved the article's length and removed most of the problematic subsections. Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:18, 19 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This section “Subsequent court cases and other events” seems long. Maybe move all to above page and recap in this article? Dw31415 (talk) 17:40, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've paraphrased the Amnesty section block quote. I note that this will probably be part of the spun-off article, i.e. the whole chapter will probably be reduced to a brief section with "main" link. Chiswick Chap (talk) 21:47, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi all, I was just randomly looking for something good to contribute toward. It seems the introduction is a little long. Thoughts? It seems like a lot of stuff in there is related to their activism. Maybe a dedicated section for that? Other thoughts on where i might help? Dw31415 (talk) 17:26, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Now that I've spun out the 2012 trial to a subsidiary article, I think the article is pretty coherent. The activism is tightly integrated with the group's performances, to the extent that it's not obvious how they could be separated. I suggest we just close the GAR as Keep at this point. Chiswick Chap (talk) 19:37, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Chiswick Chap, sounds good to me. Thanks! Dw31415 (talk) 01:43, 28 March 2025 (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.