Talk:Sheamus/GA1
GA Review[edit]
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Wugapodes (talk · contribs) 16:48, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
Will review. Disclaimer: I am a WP:WIKICUP participant, as is the nominator. Wugapodes (talk) 16:48, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
Checklist[edit]
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
- Is it reasonably well written?
- Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
- A. Has an appropriate reference section:
- B. Cites reliable sources, where necessary:
- C. No original research:
- A. Has an appropriate reference section:
- Is it broad in its coverage?
- A. Major aspects:
- B. Focused (see summary style):
- A. Major aspects:
- Is it neutral?
- Fair representation without bias:
- Fair representation without bias:
- Is it stable?
- No edit wars, etc:
- No edit wars, etc:
- 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:
- A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
- Overall:
- Pass or Fail:
- Pass or Fail:
Comments[edit]
If the comment is numbered, it must be addressed for the article to pass, if it is bulleted, it's an optional suggestion or comment that you don't need to act on right now.
When I quote things, you can use ctrl+f to search the page for the specific line I quoted.
- "put him good stead for the one-day tournament" What does this mean?
- The article says he was on "Royal Pains" in 2014 but gives no citation and is not covered in the prose of the "Other Media" section. This should be fixed.
- In the signature moves subsection, "Irish Curse" has no citation.
- For the moves, the wikilink style should be consistent. Either the typical move should be given and linked in parentheses (preferred) or piped, but mixing the two is confusing.
- "Mr. Money in the Bank" has no citation and should, considering the other ones do.
- The Early life section is a little choppy. IF you're going to go for FA I would recommend revising it so it flows better.
- You may want to think about bundling citations like those at the end of this sentence: "This victory was part of a winning streak..."
- . It will be worked later.
- A number of citations are only a title and URL. This can be a problem for verification if the links stop working. An author and/or publisher should be included as well as access dates and publication dates.
- . It will be worked later.
- The number and quality of images gives me pause. There are a lot, and some aren't of the best quality. I would recommend rethinking which ones really help contribute to conveying information and which are just decoration.
Results[edit]
On Hold for 7 days. A remarkably well done article. It;s very close to GA quality, and those few fixes I numbered above will get it there. Looking forward to the changes, and if you have questions or comments, let me know. Wugapodes (talk) 00:19, 15 January 2016 (UTC)