Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Cardiff Arms Park/1

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

Result: Delist article requires significant work on citations to regain GA status. MOS:IMAGELOC is not explicitly part of the GA criteria. MOS:LAYOUT refers to only one specific part of MOS:IMAGES (size), not IMAGELOC. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 17:30, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There are a bunch of sentences without citations. It's not on the good article criteria, but there are sandwiching issues with the images as well. Steelkamp (talk) 10:45, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Steelkamp MOS:IMAGELOC is explicitly part of the GA criteria. (t · c) buidhe 17:03, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Good to know. Steelkamp (talk) 09:57, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• I don't believe that it is, @Buidhe and Steelkamp:. The GA criteria only state:

"Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio"

"media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content;"

"media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions."

• WP:WGN notes "Mistakes to avoid: Requiring compliance with all of MOS:IMAGES (as opposed to just the sections linked in the GA criteria)". ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 19:55, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Technically what is required is compliance with MOS:LAYOUT, of which MOS:IMAGES is a sub article. Most of the important points in the latter are in the former as well and therefore required by the GA criteria. (t · c) buidhe 00:20, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• I think that's your interpretation. I don't see any indication that MOS:IMAGES is a subpage of MOS:LAYOUT, other than the former being linked from the latter (along with every MOS page). Template {{Style}} explicitly separates images and layout. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 12:23, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]