Talk:Isabelle Westbury/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 16:34, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

---

This article is in decent shape, but it needs more work before it becomes a Good Article.

1. Is it well written?

   A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:

   Well done.

   B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:

   In the Move to England section, is a period missing in this sentence ---> "Appearing for Junior Emeralds, she improved as the tournament progressed, following up scores of 18 and 27 with the tournament's highest score, 89, in the final match[24][25][26]"? I have a question, the article is named "Izzy Westbury" but nowhere in the article is "Izzy" mentioned, just on top of the article.

   Check [on the missing period]. Before passing the article, I would like to get an answer to my question. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 20:38, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

   I've added "commonly known as Izzy Westbury" at the top of the article, other than that there is little I can add. The sources I have aren't unanimous in their use of Izzy, but it is definitely her more commonly used name.Harrias ^talk 13:38, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

   I just wanted to know, cause it was something I was very curious about. Check. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 14:12, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

2. Is it verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check?

   A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:

   B. Reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose):

   C. It contains no original research:

   D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:

   B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):

4. Is it neutral?

   It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:

5. Is it stable?

   It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:

6. Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?

   A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:

   B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:

   Are free images available of Westbury?

   At the moment no, but I hope to get some later this summer. Harrias ^talk 13:39, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

   Added some in now! Harrias ^talk 18:23, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

   Awesome.

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

   Not that much to do. If the above can be dealt with, I will pass the article. Good luck!

--  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 16:34, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Thank you to Harrias for getting the stuff I left at the talk page, because I have gone off and placed the article as GA. Congrats. ;) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 14:12, 26 July 2010 (UTC)