Talk:1993 Finchley Road bombings
Page contents not supported in other languages.
 | 1993 Finchley Road bombings has been listed as one of theWarfare good articles under thegood article criteria. If you can improve it further,please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you canreassess it. Review: September 4, 2021. (Reviewed version). |
| This is thetalk page for discussing improvements to the1993 Finchley Road bombings article. This isnot a forum for general discussion of the subject of the article. |
Article policies |
| Find sources: Google (books ·news ·scholar ·free images ·WP refs) ·FENS ·JSTOR ·TWL |
 | 1993 Finchley Road bombings (final version) received apeer review by Wikipedia editors, which wasarchived on 7 July 2021. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article. |
 | A fact from1993 Finchley Road bombings appeared on Wikipedia'sMain Page in theDid you know column on 24 September 2021 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|  |
| While thebiographies of living persons policy does not apply directly to the subject of this article, it may contain material that relates to living persons, such as friends and family of persons no longer living, or living persons involved in the subject matter. Unsourced orpoorly sourced contentious material about living personsmust be removed immediately. If such material is re-inserted repeatedly, or if there are other concerns related to this policy, please seethis noticeboard. |
| This article is ratedGA-class on Wikipedia'scontent assessment scale. It is of interest to multipleWikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 | Warning: active arbitration remedies Thecontentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article is related tothe Troubles, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing this article:
Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to thepurpose of Wikipedia, any expectedstandards of behaviour, or anynormal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with thecontentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Reviewer:The Rambling Man (talk·contribs)20:54, 2 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
That's all I have for now.The Rambling Man(Keep wearing the mask...)09:50, 3 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Done. Feel free to highlight any other concerns. —Berrely • Talk∕Contribs17:50, 3 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]The result was:promoted byTheleekycauldron (talk) 22:22, 18 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Improved to Good Article status byBerrely (talk). Self-nominated at10:22, 4 September 2021 (UTC).[reply]
| General: Article is new enough and long enough |
|---|
| Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems |
|---|
Hook eligibility:
-WP:DAILYMIRROR, the source for the fact in the article, is yellow-lit. For a major event like this, surely a higher-quality source is available?
| QPQ: None required. |
Overall:
Although the specific six-months fact isn't something that pulls me in, the page topic (a bombing) has enough intrinsic interest that I think it'll get a decent number of views, and quickly reading over the page, I don't see anything better. No QPQ needed, and copyvio/sourcing/etc. assumed to have been covered during the GAN. Let me know once you've improved the source and if you have any other ideas about a hook, and then this will be good to go. Cheers,{{u|Sdkb}} talk18:55, 4 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Done —Berrely • Talk∕Contribs19:53, 4 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
, assuming that you change the article itself momentarily.{{u|Sdkb}} talk20:00, 4 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
.svg)
