Talk:Baltimore Urban Debate League

Issues

• Lead needs to be longer and summarise the whole article
• There are fair use images which need a speicific rationale of FU. Need to make comments about the FUsage, not just adding a template, per the instructions on the template
• The vast majority of the article is not referenced
• The remainder of the article had reference problems, since many of the references are the website of BUDL, so these cannot be used as they are not independent.
• The ref style needs to be consistent. They are reffed in a variety of ways, and in some cases the ref is before and some cases after the full stop. Need to see {{tl|cite web}} because the date of publication, accessdate, publisher, author, etc should be included.
• Some details like the names of students who did well seem to be going into unnecessary detail and maybe construed as bordering on advertising.

Blnguyen (bananabucket) 02:42, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

I am glad to report that this article nominee for good article status has been promoted. This is how the article, as of July 25, 2007, compares against the six good article criteria:

:1. Well written?: prose is solid

:2. Factually accurate?: article is well-sourced

:3. Broad in coverage?: more than thorough

:4. Neutral point of view?: no overt POV

:5. Article stability? article is not subject to edit wars

:6. Images?: all are free or have fair use rationales

If you feel that this review is in error, feel free to take it to a GA review. Thank you to all of the editors who worked hard to bring it to this status, and congratulations.

— Argos'Dad 02:08, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

As part of the WikiProject Good Articles, we're doing sweeps to go over all of the current GAs and see if they still meet the GA criteria. I'm specifically going over all of the "Culture and Society" articles. I believe the article currently meets the criteria and should remain listed as a Good article. I have made several minor corrections throughout the article. Altogether the article is well-written and is still in great shape after its passing in 2007. Continue to improve the article making sure all new information is properly sourced and neutral. It would also be beneficial to go through the article and update all of the access dates of the inline citations and fix any dead links. If you have any questions, let me know on my talk page and I'll get back to you as soon as I can. I have updated the article history to reflect this review. Happy editing! --Nehrams2020 (talk) 23:59, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Cyberbot II has detected that page contains external links that have either been globally or locally blacklisted.

Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed, or are highly innappropriate for Wikipedia.

This, however, doesn't necessarily mean it's spam, or not a good link.

If the link is a good link, you may wish to request whitelisting by going to the request page for whitelisting.

If you feel the link being caught by the blacklist is a false positive, or no longer needed on the blacklist, you may request the regex be removed or altered at the blacklist request page.

If the link is blacklisted globally and you feel the above applies you may request to whitelist it using the before mentioned request page, or request it's removal, or alteration, at the request page on meta.

When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags.

The whitelisting process can take its time so once a request has been filled out, you may set the invisible parameter on the tag to true.

Please be aware that the bot will replace removed tags, and will remove misplaced tags regularly.

Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:

• http://www.examiner.com/a-525464~Debating_to_the_top.html
• :Triggered by (?<=[/@.])examiner\.com(?:[:/?\x{23}]|$) on the local blacklist

If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.

From your friendly hard working bot.—cyberbot II ^Notify_Online 18:26, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

{{done|Resolved}} This issue has been resolved, and I have therefore removed the tag, if not already done. No further action is necessary.—cyberbot II ^Notify_Online 17:54, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

{{WP:Good article reassessment/Baltimore Urban Debate League/1}}