Talk:Union Jack/GA1

GA Review

I'm afraid that this article does not fulfill the Good Article criteria at this time. The main issue that I see is regarding verifiability (2a and 2b): far too much information is lacking citations, including entire paragraphs. Some sections contain only one or two ref ("Since 1801", "Other nations and regions", etc). There are two {{fact}} tags that I can see, but far more inline citations are needed. There is also an issue with the types of sources utilized. Although news articles can be very useful for citing less contested information, I feel that book/scholarly sources should be looked into. For example, Nick Groom's The Union Jack: The Story of the British Flag is listed in "Further reading", but why isn't it used as a source? Also, never ever use Wikipedia articles for sources!

Other, more technical issues I see with this article is with formatting and the MOS. The lead is not of a sufficient length and it does not adhere to WP:LEAD. Citations are missing important information, including but not limited to author, publisher and access date, per WP:CITE. You may choose to use citation templates in order to create consistency with your formatting, but it's not mandatory. Remember that references go after punctuation rather than before (preferring union jack (in lower case)[5].), use double quotes instead of single (Andrew Rosindell introduced the 'Union Flag Bill' ) and that external links should not appear in the prose (the Union Flag flown more often from government buildings.[3])

As a side note, I did not read the article in great detail for prose issues at this time. Again, the article's main problem is its references and for that alone I do not feel that the article can be promoted at this time. Please do continue to work on it and I hope to see it listed again at GAC once all of the above has been addressed. Best of luck and if you have any questions you can contact me on my talk page. Take care, María (habla conmigo) 12:44, 23 June 2008 (UTC)