Talk:Josh Sims (lacrosse)/GA1

(Redirected from Talk:Josh Sims/GA1)
Latest comment: 13 years ago by TonyTheTiger in topic GA Review

GA Review edit

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

Reviewer: Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 17:00, 22 August 2010 (UTC) GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteriaReply

  1. Is it reasonably well written?
    A. Prose quality:  
    B. MoS compliance:  
  2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
    A. References to sources:  
    B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:  
    Two fact tags need to be cited as do the tables of stats. Just a cite in the header for each table should suffice.
    Stats cited.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 18:50, 1 September 2010 (UTC)Reply
    Unsourced removed.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 18:58, 1 September 2010 (UTC)Reply
    C. No original research:  
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. Major aspects:  
    B. Focused:  
  4. Is it neutral?
    Fair representation without bias:  
  5. Is it stable?
    No edit wars, etc:  
  6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
    A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:  
    B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:  
    Can't you find any free pictures of the guy?
    I have put out Flickr requests, but lax guys are not so popular and I don't have a lot of people to ask. This is not like one of the four majors where there are a lot of people to ask.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 04:42, 24 August 2010 (UTC)Reply
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:  
    I apologize that I have not gotten to this, but I want to see if the DYK reviewers make me do anything to this before letting it get through GAC. If asked to make some changes, I want you to look at them before putting it through.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 12:15, 1 September 2010 (UTC)Reply
    Don't sweat the time; just let me know whenever you want me to look at it again. And the picture is a nice-to-have, not essential.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 17:30, 1 September 2010 (UTC)Reply