This article has been reviewed as part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles/Project quality task force in an effort to ensure all listed Good articles continue to meet the Good article criteria. In reviewing the article, I have found there are some issues that may need to be addressed.

• None of the the links to articles from The Times-Picayune apear to work, producing just a page of advertising with a blank text area.

• Ref #1 is an advert for a seminar, not a reliable source.

• Some POV seems apparent in this article, for instance "... all agree that the system designed and built by the US Army Corps of Engineers was a system in name only". This statement in the lead is not backed up anything in the body of the article and needs to be sourced.

• "Others collapsed after a brief period of overtopping (Industrial Canal) caused by "scouring" or erosion of the earthen levee walls – an egregious design flaw". Why is "scouring" in quotes? If it's a quotation, then it needs to be attributed. Is "egregious design flaw" an editor's personal opinion, or is it a quotation that can be cited?

• "A doubling of strength would be a more typical margin for highway bridges, dams, off-shore oil platforms and other public structures. There were also indications that substandard concrete may have been used at the 17th Street Canal." Who says so?

• "... ranged from 23' 31/8" to 23' 77/16" long ...". Imperial to metric conversion needs to be added, as in the rest of the article.

• "On 19 October 2005, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld announced that an independent panel of experts, under the direction of the National Academy of Sciences, would convene to evaluate the performance of the New Orleans levee system, and issue a final report in eight months. The panel would study the results provided by the two existing teams of experts that had already examined the levee failures." This needs to be updated.

• There has been a ((fact)) tag in the Levee maintenance subsection since June 2007. The subsection is very short in any case, and doesn't seem to be relevant to the article anyway.

• "Nearly two months later, on 1 June 2006, the USACE finally and unequivocally admitted responsibility for the events in New Orleans with the release of the completed report. The final draft of the IPET report states the destructive forces of Katrina were "aided by incomplete protection, lower than authorized structures, and levee sections with erodible materials." All quotations should be attributed directly after their appearance. Is this from the "final draft", or the published version of the report?

• I don't think that the article is sufficiently broad in its coverage of the aftermath of the flooding. How much damage was caused? How many deaths? Is there a new levee building scheme in place now to replace the 1965 project? What lessons have been learned from the disaster?

I will check back in no less than seven days. If progress is being made and issues are being addressed, the article will remain listed as a Good article. Otherwise, it may be delisted (such a decision may be challenged through WP:GAR). If improved after it has been delisted, it may be nominated at WP:GAN. Feel free to drop a message on my talk page if you have any questions, and many thanks for all the hard work that has gone into this article thus far. Regards, --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 18:44, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As the issues raised remain unaddressed, this article has been delisted. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 17:45, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]