Talk:1915 Vanderbilt Commodores football team/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Reviewer: Jaguar (talk · contribs) 14:36, 27 November 2016 (UTC)

Hi, I will be reviewing this against the GA criteria as part of a GAN sweep. I'll leave some comments soon. JAG UAR   14:36, 27 November 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguations: No links found.

Linkrot: No linkrot found in this article.

Checking against the GA criteria

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


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose, no copyvios, spelling and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * "The outlook for the upcoming 1915 Vanderbilt football season was not good" - tad informal, try unsatisfactory ✅
 * "To add to this, only 10 experienced players from the previous year were returning to the team" - Additionally ✅
 * "In the third quarter, Johnny Floyd ripped off 47 yards and Hubert Wiggs took it over." - this is a duplink ✅
 * "The 1915 Vanderbilt football team scored a grand total of 514 points in 510 minutes of actual playing time, thus ranking them as a legitimate "point-a-minute" team. Vanderbilt averaged 51.4 points a game. Vanderbilt led the nation in scoring, then one of few stats kept." - this needs a citation ✅
 * All harvrefs leading to the Vanderbilt Football: Tales of Commodore Gridiron History book are broken and need to be fixed ✅
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * No original research found.
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * NPOV
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars, etc.:
 * 1) 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):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * Pass/Fail:

The article is well researched and mostly well written, however I found a few issues. Once they're dealt with, this should be good to go. JAG UAR   17:53, 28 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I can see that all of the issues have been dealt with so this should be good to go.  JAG  UAR   16:19, 29 November 2016 (UTC)