Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Old Tjikko/1

Old Tjikko edit

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch article reassessment page • Most recent review

Result: Kept Identified issues have been fixed. AIRcorn (talk) 11:31, 7 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A couple of things:

This article was passed to GA status in 2009, information about "World's Oldest Trees" (clonal or not) have probably changed in the intervening 8 years, and the article probably needs to be updated (also because the tree was discovered in 2008). In any case, it seems to me that the article could use some fresh eyes.
Ref #7 has gone dead (though I did go over the present references, they seem ok but some refs erroneously state this tree is "the oldest tree".

It's at this location in the Telegraph archive. I've replaced it. The 'oldest tree' claim remains on the national parks of Sweden website. Chiswick Chap (talk) 22:30, 2 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

There is an unreferenced statement (under "Access") about the path & park rangers.

Removed, updated from national parks of Sweden site. Chiswick Chap (talk) 23:05, 2 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"Previous researchers" not specifically borne out by cited reference.

Shearonink (talk) 22:06, 2 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Removed. I must say I'm surprised an article is brought in for reassessment for such trivial reasons. Chiswick Chap (talk) 23:05, 2 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It's not a Greal Big Article like some around here but I thought it deserved some attention and editing. Perhaps I have a different view of GAR than some - I see an article on the GAR list and think "Gee, it was written quite a while ago, the GA Review was several years back, I don't have time at the moment to fix everything, but maybe someone else around here does. Let's see if we can work together to fix this up." I don't see a GAR as a punishment but as an acknowledgment that maybe an article could do with some freshening up - that's all. I'd like to point out that this article was on the "articles needing possible reassessment" list since 2014 and I thought it could maybe use some help. Shearonink (talk) 23:40, 2 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Shearonink, "couple" = 2 :-) Just wanted you to know that I'd gotten your message, but I'm not clear why you notified me, since I'm not involved in any projects that pay attention to trees in Sweden. Nyttend (talk) 23:02, 2 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I know... It's because part of the instructions for starting a GAR (I'm trying to do things around here according to Hoyle & WP) says to notify WikiProjects and past editors and you were among the Top Ten contributors (yes, you only had 2 edits but you're still active and many of the other Top Ten have gone MIA/haven't edited in several/couple of years). That's all. Thanks for checking in. Shearonink (talk) 23:40, 2 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]