Talk:2017 Liechtenstein general election

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Elections and Referendums, an ongoing effort to improve the quality of, expand upon and create new articles relating to elections, electoral reform and other aspects of democratic decision-making. For more information, visit our project page.Elections and ReferendumsWikipedia:WikiProject Elections and ReferendumsTemplate:WikiProject Elections and ReferendumsElections and Referendums

European Microstates: Liechtenstein Low‑importance

	Europe portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject European Microstates, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of European Microstates on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.European MicrostatesWikipedia:WikiProject European MicrostatesTemplate:WikiProject European MicrostatesEuropean Microstates
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Liechtenstein (assessed as Low-importance).

This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

2017 Liechtenstein general election has been listed as one of the Social sciences and society good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Review: February 8, 2026. (Reviewed version).

GA review

Latest comment: 4 months ago8 comments2 people in discussion

Passed. Surayeproject3 (talk) 16:36, 8 February 2026 (UTC)Reply

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

This review is transcluded from Talk:2017 Liechtenstein general election/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: TheBritinator (talk · contribs) 15:37, 1 February 2026 (UTC)Reply

Reviewer: Surayeproject3 (talk · contribs) 23:23, 3 February 2026 (UTC)Reply

Going to review this nomination as well, having just reviewed the 2021 article and as another entry for the backlog drive. Authorship is primarily from nominator, Earwig shows 3.5% similarity so any copyvio's are unlikely, and no concerns regarding WP:GAFAIL. Article is stable and images used are relevant/tagged, so Critera 5 and Criteria 6 have been met. I will review the rest of the article at my next availability. Surayeproject3 (talk) 23:23, 3 February 2026 (UTC)Reply

Criteria 1

One grammar point below but no significant issues with Criteria 1:

Zwiefelhofer stated that he would not be a part of the next government should the party loose the election. - change "loose" to "lose"

Criteria 2

As with the 2021 article I went ahead and did a spotcheck of the sources to make sure that everything was verifiable and sourced. "Electoral system" is the same as the 2021 article so nothing new to confirm there (I don't believe it is considered WP:PLAGIARISM as it is your own writing). Only two issues I could note with the article sourcing:

For citation 11, the article says The party launched its campaign on 23 August..., but the cited source from that day says ...the Progressive Civic Party also launched its election campaign yesterday. Please clarify the date that the party launched its campaign.
Same issue for the VU with citation 13. Please clarify/confirm when they started their campaign.
I cannot access citation 33 to confirm the information. Please archive it and confirm.

Otherwise, everything else looks good; once the above is addressed Criteria 2 will be met.

Criteria 3/4

Like with the 2021 article, this one delves into all aspects of the election, plus background information and aftermath. No unnecessary details are given. The article is neutral and no indication of any POV.

Pinging nominator User:TheBritinator with my review. Surayeproject3 (talk) 22:05, 7 February 2026 (UTC)Reply

Also, just like the 2021 article, any red-links can use Template:Ill if they have articles on other Wikimedia projects. Surayeproject3 (talk) 22:10, 7 February 2026 (UTC)Reply

@Surayeproject3 Done. TheBritinator (talk) 16:31, 8 February 2026 (UTC)Reply

All looks good, so I will pass the article. Surayeproject3 (talk) 16:35, 8 February 2026 (UTC)Reply

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Add topic