Talk:Income quintiles/Failed GA-possible improvements
Failed Good Article nomination
This article failed nomination because it did not meet the following criteria of the five: (1) well written Needs massive work in this area. It jumps from one idea to the next. For example, the second sentence begins "Here all households are divided into quintiles,..." Here where? At the chart on the right? It needs to say that. Also, that is a hasty second sentence. The whole first paragraph needs to be an overview of the entire article. See WP:LEAD. And really, that is just the beginning. There is bad grammar ("This contrast sharply to...") througout the article. Also sentences like this one: "The vast majority, 88.35% of households in the top quintile were family households with 80.8% of all households in this quintile being composed of married couple families that featured a mean of two income earners." This is a run-on sentence without enough explanation for someone new to the topic. (2) Factually accurate Not too bad here, but only two references is a little light. But, this is one of the stronger areas, good job. (3) broad in its coverage Doubtful. The fact that it is still classified as a stub says it all. (4) neutral point of view policy Looks good here. (5) It is stable Stable, but only because it needs massive work and only has one editor. I would suggest putting this up for Peer review to invite more editors to work on it.--Esprit15d 18:44, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
- Thank you for the suggestions for improvements-I was doubtful when nominating this article, as it only covers a rather small subject. It is stable becuase further information is found on this article's parent article Household income in the United States. I will fix the sentences once I have time. Sorry for nominating such a short and limited article-the problem is that the subject matter is so limited there hardly is any room for a lead. Perhaps this wasn't meant to be a GA. Thank you for reviewing. Signaturebrendel 19:03, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
- Don't apologize. This is just a work in progress, and is coming along. In another month, it may be brilliant!--Esprit15d 19:36, 9 August 2006 (UTC)