About what quickfailing reeally is for   efore conducting an extensive review and after ensuring you are viewing an unvandalized version check the article and its edit history for the following basic problems which are sometimes found in GA nominations   The article completely lacks reliable sources  see WikipediaVerifiabilitySmall articles that have a single main source may still be adequately referenced without the use of inline citations  Inline citations may not be required for some articles the criteria name the only six types of material that require inline citations  The topic is treated in an obviously nonneutral way  see WikipediaNeutral point of viewArticles on controversial topics can be both neutral and stable but this is only ensured if regular editors make scrupulous efforts to keep the article wellreferenced  Note that neutrality does not mean that all points of view are covered equally instead no point of view should be given undue weight  There are cleanup banners that are obviously still valid including    or large numbers of   or similar inline tags See also   The article is or has been the subject of ongoing or recent unresolved edit wars  The article specifically concerns a rapidly unfolding current event with a definite endpoint  The article contains significant close paraphrasing or copyright violations  Another thing to look for is that if the article has been nominated more than once go back to the previous reviews and make sure suggestions from the other reviews have been addressed  If the article has any of the above problems it may be premature to provide a detailed review in which case you can quickfail the nomination in accordance with step two of the GAN guidelines as long as you explain this clearly on the review page They most commonly apply when the nominator is inexperienced or is not a regular editor of the article If you quickfail an article according to the above criteria leave a short note explaining the major problems and inform the nominator  Even if an article can be quickfailed according to the above criteria reviewers could also    Leave a short note explaining the major problems but without officially closing the review until the editors at the article have had a few days to respond to your concerns  You may find that they are interested in significantly improving the article  Provide a detailed review as more specific information will help future editors improve the article to meet all of the Good article criteria but close the review as not listed  Withdraw from the review and let another reviewer decide how to handle it      Emphasis added by me So please remember to always actuallycarefully read any policiesguidelines before using them and to not ask other users for opinions because they might be completely misguided  just always find and read them yourself like that source