Talk:2007–08 Sunderland A.F.C. season/GA1

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


 * GA review (see here for criteria)

This is a nice piece of work, and a bit of a hell for a reviewer!
 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS):
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * some bits are close to WP:NOR
 * 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, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * Sorry guys.. The rational is that you can find a tonne of images under Fair-use and its slightly biased towards the other teams.
 * Um, so is that a pass? –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone  13:51, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Sorry... its a fail... User:Itfc+canes=me Talk Contributions 17:41, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
 * No, it's not, until you provide a reason(s) why. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone  14:15, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
 * There you go... the article is on hold... i just couldn't get the template to work correctly. User:Itfc+canes=me Talk Contributions 17:41, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
 * But you still have yet to provide a rationale for your actions. The nominator is expected to know what you find concerning about the article? –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone  20:36, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Happy? User:Itfc+canes=me Talk Contributions 11:43, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Sorry, no. Your job as a reviewer is to list the concerns you have about the article, in order for the nominator to know what to fix. Images are not a requirement for GA, so that is not a valid reason to place an article on-hold. Cheers, –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone  13:35, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Um, so is that a pass? –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone  13:51, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Sorry... its a fail... User:Itfc+canes=me Talk Contributions 17:41, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
 * No, it's not, until you provide a reason(s) why. –Juliancolton Tropical <sup style="color:#666660;">Cyclone  14:15, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
 * There you go... the article is on hold... i just couldn't get the template to work correctly. User:Itfc+canes=me <sup style="color:Orange;">Talk Contributions 17:41, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
 * But you still have yet to provide a rationale for your actions. The nominator is expected to know what you find concerning about the article? –Juliancolton <sup style="color:#666660;">Tropical <sup style="color:#666660;">Cyclone  20:36, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Happy? User:Itfc+canes=me <sup style="color:Orange;">Talk Contributions 11:43, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Sorry, no. Your job as a reviewer is to list the concerns you have about the article, in order for the nominator to know what to fix. Images are not a requirement for GA, so that is not a valid reason to place an article on-hold. Cheers, –Juliancolton <sup style="color:#666660;">Tropical <sup style="color:#666660;">Cyclone  13:35, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

(out) Yeah, Itfc, you really need to be specific. For example, you can't just say "some bits are close to OR"--you have to say what bits are close to OR and how. Check out Dana Boomer for an excellent GA reviewer who is very, very specific about her concerns. [ roux  ] [ x ] 22:20, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Its been failed as it has been over 7 days since the GA review and there has not been enough improvments... i'm gonna run away from Gaing now.... User:Itfc+canes=me <sup style="color:Orange;">Talk Contributions 11:39, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Cheers, but theres no reason to give up reviewing GACs, just take your time, read through Reviewing good articles and possibly seek getting a reviewing mentor. Sunderland06  (talk) 13:10, 16 November 2008 (UTC)