Jump to content

Talk:Cal Ripken Jr./GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing

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

Reviewer: Sportsguy17 (talk · contribs) 01:06, 22 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I will be reviewing this article. I look forward to working with you, Oriolesfan8 . Tell me when you want to get started. For this next week, I will be available Dec 22 and 23, a little less on Dec 24, 25, and 26. And I am going snowboarding Dec 27-29 without good internet. Tell me what you can do. Thanks. Sportsguy17 (TC) 01:06, 22 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm glad to see you'll be understanding about time, because I actually won't have internet access all week. If you don't mind waiting till the 30th, that would be great. Thank you for taking up this article, and have a nice Christmas! Oriolesfan8 (talk) 12:29, 22 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks and enjoy your holidays and vacation. Sportsguy17 (TC) 19:02, 22 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Ready to begin when you are. Oriolesfan8 (talk) 16:20, 31 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Awesome. Reflinks looks good, albeit Checklinks is a little concerning. Try if possible to check any links that are not white, especially the red-highlighted link and if needed, replace it. Next, I shall be giving a section-by-section analysis/review. Sportzilla | ROARR!! 02:39, 2 January 2014 (UTC) Note: Alternate account of Sportsguy17[reply]

Oriolesfan8 - This is brilliant, splendid, well-referenced, great use of visuals, and a pleasure to read. Here are my initial thoughts broadly speaking:

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

  1. Is it reasonably well written?
    A. Prose quality, no copyvios, spelling and grammar:
    B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
  2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
    A. Has an appropriate reference section:
    B. Citation to reliable sources where necessary:
    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 tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
    B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:

Pass! Sportsguy17 (TC) 13:39, 4 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

So, although there are a few dead links and redirecting links, it is very well-referenced and very good to read. I will work with spelling & grammar and see what I find. Sportzilla | ROARR!! 02:52, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The spelling and grammar looked good and I didn't find any copyvios, so here is a pass for you. Sportsguy17 (TC) 13:41, 4 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]