Talk:Ian Bell/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Harrias (talk · contribs) 12:29, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose, no copyvios, spelling and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:
It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall:
Pass/Fail:

The article is extremely poorly referenced. There are numerous entire sections without any referencing, and even where it is provided, it tends to be inconsistent and incomplete. The article is split into far too many sections: one per tour is really not necessary, and a better summary of his career is needed, rather than just lists of his highlights. The tables at the bottom of the article do not meet the MOS guidelines on sortability and accessibility. This article is a long way from being of Good article quality. Harrias ^talk 12:29, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]