Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Brown v. Board of Education/2: Difference between revisions

===[[Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Brown v. Board of Education/2|Brown v. Board of Education]]===

: {{al|Brown v. Board of Education|noname=yes}} • <span class="plainlinksneverexpand">[//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Good_article_reassessment/Brown_v._Board_of_Education/2&action=watch Watch article reassessment page]</span> • GAN review not found

There is a lot of uncited text throughout the article, including entire paragraphs. This was brought up in the 2023 GAR, and uncited text seems to have been brought back into the article. Also, the "Other comments" section should have a heading that describes the text more effectively or have the information moved to more appropriate places in the article. There are several sources listed in "Further reading" that should be evaluated for their inclusion as inline citations or removed, and too many external links listed. The "Legal criticism and praise" section is quite long, and I think lots of that information and block quotes can be more effectively summarised. [[User:Z1720|Z1720]] ([[User talk:Z1720|talk]]) 20:51, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

 

:Just to clarify, but the reason why it was kept originally mainly has to do with it being okay for GAs to have general references back then. However, with updated quality expectations I'm not sure if this article would pass reassessment now. [[User:Onegreatjoke|Onegreatjoke]] ([[User talk:Onegreatjoke|talk]]) 20:54, 27 August 2024 (UTC)