Talk:Eddie Bayers/GA1
Appearance
GA Review
[edit]Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: SabreBD (talk) 20:32, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
Its been far too long a delay. I have just started on this and will post here when I have time to get some comments together.--SabreBD (talk) 20:32, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
Checking against GA criteria
[edit]- It is well written.
- It is factually accurate and verifiable.
- a (references):
b (citations to reliable sources):
c (OR):
- Not all online references are live links
- The article is very well referenced.
- Sources all appear to be reliable
- All sources that can be linked support the cited statements
- a (references):
- It is broad in its coverage of important aspects of the subjects life and career.
- a (major aspects):
b (focused):
- a (major aspects):
- It follows the neutral point of view policy.
- Fair representation without bias:
- It appears fair and un-biassed
- Fair representation without bias:
- It is stable.
- No edit wars, etc.:
- Stable, no edit warring
- No edit wars, etc.:
- 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):
- One image used, with correct licensing and a caption. Might be nice to see more pictures (for example one with a band - although I know this can be difficult), but not a GA requirement
- a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):
- Overall:
- Pass/Fail:
- Pass/Fail:
This is a well-written and very well-sourced article that can easily pass the good article review with a couple of minor fixes:
- MOS:BIO says that the opening paragraph (i.e. the lead) of a biographical article should contain the date of birth (its on the infobox, but just needs adding to the text) and indicates it should include nationality.
- The article is very well referenced and these are consistent and conform to the guidelines, but some of the references do not go through to the target article (notes 1 and 6 for example) - probably because the target has been moved. Either the target needs to be found or some other sources found. Note 1 is quite important as it substantiates the basic biographical details.
It should be possible to pass the article as GA when these minor points are fixed.--SabreBD (talk) 22:28, 27 July 2010 (UTC)