Talk:Agender/GA2

GA review

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

Nominator: Pencilceaser123 (talk · contribs) 02:39, 22 June 2026 (UTC)

Reviewer: Jishara (talk · contribs) 15:53, 2 July 2026 (UTC)

Hi! Excited to do this one. I will ping the nominator with the results after my initial review. Jishara (talk) 15:53, 2 July 2026 (UTC)

@Pencilceaser123: First, thanks for nominating this article, it's very interesting. Just a few comments below - mostly in 1, 2, 3 - I put it on hold for updates. Let me know when you've gotten a chance to fix. Jishara (talk) 16:57, 4 July 2026 (UTC)

Fixed everything and added some other stuff! Pencilceaser123 (talk) 01:34, 7 July 2026 (UTC)

@Pencilceaser123: Great work. love the article. a followup spotcheck resulted in no spotted errors. it's approved. Jishara (talk) 02:03, 7 July 2026 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose, spelling, grammar, and understandability): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

   Some repeats here - both Identity and Related Identities discuss demiagender and neutrois. Also, "indifferent towards their own gender identity, and may have no feelings toward one's gender identity" is also a bit repetitive, so please reword or shorten if possible. Tweaked a few of the smaller things such as capitalization, spelling... but please fix these bigger ones.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable, as shown by a source spot-check.

   a (reference section): b (inline citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):

   There are uncited line items (including Jazmin Bean), as well as an uncited chunk (The term agender also covers several related gender identities. Identities that fall under the agender label include demiagender and libragender, as well as identities similar to agender such as neutrois, among others.) (i'm not entirely sure if the source at the end of the subsequent sentence backs it up as I can't access that -if you can add an additional source at the end of the sentence). Spot check of 10 of the sources (5, 33, 35, 41, 13, 42, 2, 16, 19, 14) reveals no problems. Some sources are weaker, but all are being used for uses appropriate to their strength (for example, social media posts by someone for their stated identity, etc). No signs of copyvio and a check both by earwig and by me gives no copyvio signs.

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   Appears to not discuss libragender at all, despite it being listed as a subcategory of agender - perhaps adding a sentence or two in Related Identities or other sections?

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

   Factual, encyclopedic, and neutral - no problems here.

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

   Seems reasonably stable - some minor edit discussions but nothing sufficient to jeopardize stability.

6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

   Images are all effective, used with relevant captions in relevant places, and have usable status.

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   On hold

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.