Talk:Jess Fishlock/GA1

Latest comment: 7 years ago by Hmlarson in topic GA Review

GA Review

edit

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

Reviewer: Kaiser matias (talk · contribs) 12:25, 26 April 2017 (UTC)Reply


GA review
(see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose, spelling, and grammar):  
    b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):  
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable, as shown by a source spot-check.
    a (references):  
    b (citations to reliable sources):  
    c (OR):  
    d (copyvio and plagiarism):  
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects):  
    b (focused):  
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:  
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:  
  6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):  
    b (appropriate use with suitable captions):  

Overall:
Pass/Fail:  

  ·   ·   ·  
  • In the lead, note what league the Seattle Reign FC play in, and spell out what "FA WSL" is, or at least what the WSL refers to.
Updated Hmlarson (talk) 17:27, 26 April 2017 (UTC)Reply
  • In Early life, you have "at age 16" and "at age sixteen;" stick with one, I think MOS suggests spelling out under 20 but consistency is the key.
Updated Hmlarson (talk) 17:27, 26 April 2017 (UTC)Reply
  • Cardiff City LFC has no citations.
Updated. Hmlarson (talk) 21:25, 26 April 2017 (UTC)Reply
  • First paragraph of the Bristol Academy section has no citation.
Updated. Hmlarson (talk) 22:01, 26 April 2017 (UTC)Reply
  • After mentioning the National Women's Soccer League, give the abbreviation for it.
Updated Hmlarson (talk) 17:27, 26 April 2017 (UTC)Reply
  • "Fishlock received a controversial red card..." is there any reason for the controversy? If so you should add it, if not it may not be necessary to note that.
Expanded Hmlarson (talk) 17:27, 26 April 2017 (UTC)Reply
  • The 8–6–8 record is given the note explaining they're wins and losses, whereas a previous mention of a team record did not. Again, try to maintain consistency with that and either have all records linked like that, just the first mention, or none.
Updated Hmlarson (talk) 17:27, 26 April 2017 (UTC)Reply
  • Any way to expand the coaching career section? This isn't an issue, just it would be good perhaps to include her record as a coach, or some detail like that, to make it a little more in depth.
Added a few more sentences. Hmlarson (talk) 17:27, 26 April 2017 (UTC)Reply
  • References: 9, 15, 18, 36, and 54 are all dead.
I ran broken link check and resolved all. The two left in the report (9 and 34) are working if you click on them. Hmlarson (talk) 21:25, 26 April 2017 (UTC)Reply

Once these are taken care of I'll give it another look, but should be good at that point.

Great it looks good now. Kaiser matias (talk) 00:51, 29 April 2017 (UTC)Reply
Thanks for your help Kaiser matias. Much appreciated. Hmlarson (talk) 01:27, 29 April 2017 (UTC)Reply