Economy of Ohio was one of theSocial sciences and society good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet thegood article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can berenominated. Editors may also seek areassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Article milestones Date Process Result February 27, 2008 Featured article candidate Not promoted March 16, 2008 Good article nominee Listed November 1, 2008 Featured article candidate Not promoted April 2, 2023 Good article reassessment Delisted A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia'sMain Page in the"Did you know?" column onFebruary 20, 2008. The text of the entry was:Did you know ...that theeconomy of Ohio includes the world's largestplants for processingyogurt,soup,ketchup andfrozen pizza? Current status:Delisted good article

This article is ratedB-class on Wikipedia'scontent assessment scale. It is of interest to the followingWikiProjects:

EconomicsLow‑importance This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Economics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage ofEconomics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussion and see a list of open tasks.EconomicsWikipedia:WikiProject EconomicsTemplate:WikiProject EconomicsEconomics Low This article has been rated asLow-importance on theproject's importance scale. United States:OhioMid‑importance This article is within the scope ofWikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to theUnited States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States Mid This article has been rated asMid-importance on theproject's importance scale. This article is supported byWikiProject Ohio (assessed asTop-importance).

I tried verifying the first paragraph and couldn't validate the claim of being ranked #8 in 2008. In 2009, Ohio was ranked 39th overall. Also, the link to reference [7] leads to a log-in page that can be bypassed only with the month and date of the issue. (I couldn't find an article at the website that could substantiate the claim of #5 Ranking.) Ohio has 5 of the top 115 colleges ... and was ranked #8 by the same magazine in 2008 for best high schools.[6] Overall, the state's schools were ranked #5 in the country in 2010.[7] - DjKinDayton.—Precedingunsigned comment added by137.100.121.30 (talk) 16:54, 21 June 2010 (UTC) Reference [7] was validated on 20100621 by DjKinDayton—Precedingunsigned comment added by137.100.121.30 (talk)17:18, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• The only reason I didn't pass it was that single sources are used continuously throughout the article. This might not matter, but I'm still not sure. Good luck!§tepshep •¡Talk to me!18:20, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've renominated the article atGAN - I glanced, and it needs a more thorough review than just "one source throughout" IMO. Hopefully someone will give it such, and I'll be happy to provide a 2nd opinion if they need it.dihydrogen monoxide(H₂0)09:35, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (seehere for what the criteria are, andhere for what they are not)

1. It isreasonably well written.

   a(prose, no copyvios, spelling and grammar): b(MoS forlead,layout,word choice,fiction, andlists):

2. It isfactually accurate andverifiable.

   a(reference section): b(citations toreliable sources): c(OR):

3. It isbroad in its coverage.

   a(major aspects): b(focused):

4. It follows theneutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It isstable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

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

   a(images are tagged and non-free content havefair use rationales): b(appropriate use withsuitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

GA review (seehere for criteria)

This is a nice piece of work, but it still has some shortcomings with respect to the good article criteria.

1. It isreasonably well written.

   a(prose): b(MoS):

2. It isfactually accurate andverifiable.

   a(references): b(citations toreliable sources): c(OR):

   I know there were concerns in the FAC about the article having only one source for sources (the Ohio Department of Development), but I don't see it as a problem given that it's from a state government and appears to be reliable. Furthermore, there are sources (though not many of them proportionally to the ODoD ones) from other outlets as well, so it's hardly entirely a one-source article. Finally, this is GA, not FA. We're a little more flexible here.

3. It isbroad in its coverage.

   a(major aspects): b(focused):

4. It follows theneutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It isstable.

   No edit wars etc.:

6. It is illustrated byimages, where possible and appropriate.

   a(images are tagged and non-free images havefair use rationales): b(appropriate use withsuitable captions):

   Kudos on the clever use of the state quarter for the lede image.

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   Good luck at FA now! I'll certainly vote for it. --Hemlock Martinis (talk)18:47, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Articles should not be given A-class ratings without undergoing review. WikiProject Ohio has an article review departmenthere and WikiProject Economics has no formal review process but can be reachedhere.§hep •¡Talk to me!01:53, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's a little odd to call the Wright-Patterson Air Force Base an industry with headquarters in Dayton, OH. The Air Force, of course, has its headquarters atthe Pentagon, in Washington DC (or Arlington, Virginia, depending on how you think of it)..Geoffrey.landis (talk)15:17, 16 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Changed the wording for that section. It shouldn't have had the word "headquarters" in the section anyway. It was meant to list major employers for Ohio, not necessarily only headquarters. WPAFB is included in the list from the cited source, so it should be included. Thanks for pointing that out. It needed rewording.Texas141 (talk)19:54, 16 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Footnote 150 cites a Dec 2010 article by Prachi Patel in the online mag Heise Online to support the statement that Nanotek contributed an important breakthrough in ultracap energy density. This German-language article appears in Heise-Online's 'Technology Review' section; as such it is a same-day translation of Patel's original article in Technology Review, the MIT journal of tech news. For the English WP article on Ohio Economy, the original Technology Review article seems more appropriate. Changing the citation from Heise-Online (http://www.heise.de/tr/artikel/Elektroden-aus-zerknuelltem-Kohlenstoff-1149424.html) to Technology Review onlineBookerj (talk)19:07, 24 May 2012 (UTC).[reply]

The info box saysDr. Kathryn Dwyer Sullivan, a resident of Columbus, was the first woman to walk in space. This directly contradicts information in the pageList of female astronauts which states thatSvetlana Savitskaya was the first woman to walk in space. Which is correct?--Wikishagnik (talk)18:26, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Should we subject this article to peer review?Lbertolotti (talk)15:12, 12 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Delisted good articles
• Wikipedia Did you know articles
• B-Class Economics articles
• Low-importance Economics articles
• WikiProject Economics articles
• B-Class United States articles
• Mid-importance United States articles
• B-Class United States articles of Mid-importance
• B-Class Ohio articles
• Top-importance Ohio articles
• WikiProject Ohio articles
• WikiProject United States articles