Talk:Bicycle/GA1

GA Reassessment

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

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

---

This review is part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles/Project quality task force/Sweeps, a project devoted to re-reviewing Good Articles listed before August 26, 2007.

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose quality:

   Examples such as "Multiple innovators contributed to the history of the bicycle by developing precursor human-powered vehicles" and "Several why-not-the-rear-wheel inventions followed" are not exactly up to par.

   B. MoS compliance:

   Introduction- Intro is too short, please see WP:LEAD for more info. List incorporation- Lists should be avoided, it is my opinion that the "Uses" section should be presented in prose instead of a list. Construction and parts- A section devoted to a single sentence is most certainly not MOS compliant. The "parts" section also violates this guideline.

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. References to sources:

   B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

   Whole paragraphs and sections are uncited.

   C. No original research:

   Uncited statements may contain 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:

   Too many images clutter the article.

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

   After careful consideration, it is my opinion that this article should be de-listed immediately. Uncited statements are the issue of major concern, secondary issues include unacceptable prose and image clutter. --ErgoSum•talk•trib 22:56, 31 May 2009 (UTC)