Talk:2002 BDO World Darts Championship/GA1

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

Reviewer: Lee Vilenski (talk · contribs) 22:11, 29 February 2020 (UTC)

Hello, I am planning on reviewing this article for GA Status, over the next couple of days. Thank you for nominating the article for GA status. I hope I will learn some new information, and that my feedback is helpful.

If nominators or editors could refrain from updating the particular section that I am updating until it is complete, I would appreciate it to remove a edit conflict. Please address concerns in the section that has been completed above (If I've raised concerns up to references, feel free to comment on things like the lede.)

I generally provide an overview of things I read through the article on a first glance. Then do a thorough sweep of the article after the feedback is addressed. After this, I will present the pass/failure. I will use strikethrough tags when concerns are met. Even if something is obvious why my concern is met, please leave a message as courtesy.

Best of luck! you can also use the ✅ tag to state when something is addressed.  Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs)

Please let me know after the review is done, if you were happy with the review! Obviously this is regarding the article's quality, however, I want to be happy and civil to all, so let me know if I have done a good job, regardless of the article's outcome.

Immediate Failures

 * It is a long way from meeting any one of the six good article criteria -
 * It contains copyright infringements -
 * It has, or needs, cleanup banners that are unquestionably still valid. These include,, or large numbers of , , or similar tags. (See also ). -
 * It is not stable due to edit warring on the page. -

Lede

 * Should we note that Surrey is in England?
 * Can we have the official title (With Embassy) in the lede somewhere.
 * The infobox should have a year in the event title.
 * Tony David, who has the blood-clotting disorder haemophilia, - whilst I'm sure it's important that he has the disorder, is it really super relevent to him winning the event? If there is a note regarding his disorder being notable, I'm sure we can place that elsewhere in the lede.
 * England captain Martin Adams is a seaofblue. Try England captain Martin Adams
 * A women's world championship was held for the second time. - should be in the first paragraph. See notes later
 * Is a whitewash really suitible for a best-of-3?

General

 * The background section should arguably be it's own section. The article writes as if the event is only for men, and there happens to be a women's event. Even if that is how the media projects this, we shouldn't.
 * was seeded first and Martin Adams, the England captain, was seeded second - were they seeded second because they were the England captain?
 * The remaining five places... This bit is after the seedings. It should probably explain this is for the qualification places.
 * Do we need sources after each player name?
 * best-of-11 frames - I don't think you meant this.
 * "to qualify for the BDO championship." - I prefer "took their places".
 * Is it Round 1 or first round?
 * He began with a maximum (180) - do we need to say both?
 * Eighth seed Wayne Mardle went 2–0 ahead of Richardson in set three before the latter equalled at 2–2 . - needs a source, and fix punct
 * Quarter-finals to the final - is a terrible name for a section. If we move the above bit to a background section, you don't need a subsection.
 * three-dart finishing averages - Isn't this a three-dart averages?

GA Review

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


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):  d (copyvio and plagiarism):
 * 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:
 * 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) 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:

Comments

 * Automated note - If you fancy returning the favour, I have outstanding GA nominations that require reviewing at WP:GAN. I'd be very grateful if you were to complete one of these, however it's definately not manditory. Best Wishes,  Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs)
 * Only a few comments here . I'll place on hold. Best Wishes,  Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 17:01, 2 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Have made the changes suggested above. MWright96 (talk) 17:53, 2 March 2020 (UTC)


 * Passing to GA. Good job! Best Wishes,  Lee Vilenski  (talk • contribs) 18:53, 2 March 2020 (UTC)