Jump to content

Talk:Jonna Adlerteg

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

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Jonna Adlerteg. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:56, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 12:37, 30 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Jonna Adlerteg/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Riley1012 (talk · contribs) 11:06, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: Firefangledfeathers (talk · contribs) 16:01, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Picking this one up! Thank you, Riley1012, for working on this article. First review items will be out soon. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 16:01, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

  1. Is it well written?
    A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
    B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
  2. Is it verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check?
    A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:
    B. Reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose):
    Spot checked 7 sources (citations 14, 28, 36, 41, 51, 56, 73 as of this version as well as sources that came up naturally during the review. Minor issues described in review below.
    C. It contains no original research:
    D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:
    Spot checks and Earwig came up clean.
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:
    All aspects of a traditional athlete bio are present.
    B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
  4. Is it neutral?
    It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
  5. Is it stable?
    It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
    Stability evident in article history.
  6. Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
    A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:
    All licenses at Commons pass a smell test.
    B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
    All good.
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:


GA review items

[edit]

Non-GA-criteria suggestions (optional)

[edit]

Items in this section are based on guidelines that are not part of the GA criteria. You are free to work on them or not, and progress won't matter for GA status. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 16:35, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  1. Images could use brief alt text, mainly to indicate the ones in which she's demonstrating a gymnastics move. See MOS:ALT for guidance. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 16:35, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
     Done -Riley1012 (talk) 13:57, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Please review the links for overlinking. London and Tokyo, for example, do not need to be linked per MOS:OL. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 16:35, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
     Done -Riley1012 (talk) 13:57, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  3. In §2012, should we mention that she didn't advance to the Olympic finals? Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 16:49, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
     Done -Riley1012 (talk) 14:59, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  4. The heavy use of press releases is not a GA disqualifier, but the overall strength of the article could be improved by using more independent sources. Some press release citations are redundant and can be removed. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 18:21, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
     Done -Riley1012 (talk) 14:59, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Per WP:SAYWHEREYOUGOTIT, consider using a parameter like "via" to indicate the citations that were retrieved from mynewsdesk.com. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 18:21, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
     Done -Riley1012 (talk) 14:59, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey @Firefangledfeathers: just wondering if you had any further comments? -Riley1012 (talk) 23:30, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'll have more for you tomorrow! Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 01:58, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Firefangledfeathers: Sorry to bother you again, any updates? Riley1012 (talk) 17:14, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, Riley1012! Looks like I forgot to publish the most recent batch of items. More soon. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 15:55, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Okay Firefangledfeathers, I believe I have addressed everything. -Riley1012 (talk) 22:43, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]