Talk:SM Center Ormoc
Add topicLatest comment: 10 months ago by TheNuggeteer in topic GA review
 | SM Center Ormoc has been listed as one of the Geography and places good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. Review: September 29, 2025. (Reviewed version). |
| This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
GA review
[edit]| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
- This review is transcluded from Talk:SM Center Ormoc/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Nominator: TheNuggeteer (talk · contribs) 08:53, 11 September 2025 (UTC)
Reviewer: MisawaSakura (talk · contribs) 23:32, 28 September 2025 (UTC)
- Starting review. MisawaSakura (talk) 23:32, 28 September 2025 (UTC)
- Images are fine. MisawaSakura (talk) 23:47, 28 September 2025 (UTC)
- Refs are acceptable and consistently formatted. MisawaSakura (talk) 23:47, 28 September 2025 (UTC)
- Copyvio returns a very low score, which is good! MisawaSakura (talk) 23:47, 28 September 2025 (UTC)
- "According to the website," what site, or who? 23:47, 28 September 2025 (UTC)
- Do you know of a similar article that is already GA that I can compare this too? MisawaSakura (talk) 23:47, 28 September 2025 (UTC)
- I have been trying to find malls of similar popularity (mall GAs are much more popular) and there are none that I can see.
🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 (My "blotter")03:25, 29 September 2025 (UTC)
- I have been trying to find malls of similar popularity (mall GAs are much more popular) and there are none that I can see.
- My impression is that this article is a bit short for such a large mall. On the talk page see "The following references may be useful when improving this article in the future:" Can you work those references and expand the article some? MisawaSakura (talk) 23:47, 28 September 2025 (UTC)
- @MisawaSakura: Yes, the article seems short, but I have been trying to scrape for sources. The possible references in the talk contribute little to the article as the information is already there; most of them are unreliable or primary and already has a better replacement. I will remove those references. Thank you for the review!
🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 (My "blotter")03:30, 29 September 2025 (UTC)
- @MisawaSakura: Yes, the article seems short, but I have been trying to scrape for sources. The possible references in the talk contribute little to the article as the information is already there; most of them are unreliable or primary and already has a better replacement. I will remove those references. Thank you for the review!