Talk:2002 World Snooker Championship/GA1

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

Reviewer: HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk · contribs) 22:12, 8 July 2020 (UTC)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.


 * a (prose): 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):
 * 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
 * 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
 * Pass/Fail:
 * Pass/Fail:

Lead

 * Could The championships were sponsored by cigarette manufacturer Embassy. A total prize fund of £1,615,770 was awarded at the event, with the winner receiving £260,000 be combined into one sentence?
 * I did try, but it all just looked weird. I've moved the sentence though. Best Wishes,  Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 18:49, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

Second round

 * Could the chiropractor claim be expanded a bit, like include a quote? Just seems odd to book an appointment when there's a tournament
 * Added a quote - he was in quite a bit of pain. Best Wishes,  Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 11:15, 15 July 2020 (UTC)