Talk:2008–09 York City F.C. season/GA1

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

Overall, this article is good and very detailed. The following things need to be fixed though:
 * "Despite this, former Exeter City winger Lee Elam featured in a 1–1 draw against Leeds United." What does featured mean? The sentence is probably okay, just not that experienced with some football jargon. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wizardman (talk • contribs) 04:00, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

As it appears that User:Wizardman has withdrawn from this review, I shall be reviewing this page against the Good Article criteria, following its nomination for Good Article status. Jezhotwells (talk) 16:30, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Quick fail criteria assessment
 * 1) The article completely lacks reliable sources – see Wikipedia:Verifiability.
 * 2) The topic is treated in an obviously non-neutral way – see Wikipedia:Neutral point of view.
 * 3) There are cleanup banners that are obviously still valid, including cleanup, wikify, NPOV, unreferenced or large numbers of fact, clarifyme, or similar tags.
 * 4) The article is or has been the subject of ongoing or recent, unresolved edit wars.
 * 5) The article specifically concerns a rapidly unfolding current event with a definite endpoint.
 * 1) The article is or has been the subject of ongoing or recent, unresolved edit wars.
 * 2) The article specifically concerns a rapidly unfolding current event with a definite endpoint.
 * 1) The article specifically concerns a rapidly unfolding current event with a definite endpoint.
 * 1) The article specifically concerns a rapidly unfolding current event with a definite endpoint.

No problems found when checking against quick fail criteria, moving on to substantive review. Jezhotwells (talk) 16:41, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Checking against GA criteria

 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose):
 * I have made a number of copy-edits as has User:Wizardman. There are a number of rather long paragraphs which I would like to see broken up. PLease check the prose carefully as more copy editing made be needed.  I may have missed some clumsy phrasing as a result of the rather dense text. Jezhotwells (talk) 17:40, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I've had a go at copyediting the article. Mattythewhite (talk) 18:59, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
 * b (MoS):
 * T he 'Lead should be a summary of the entire article - currently it doesn't mention the final position in the league. Perhaps a sentence or two summarizing the highest and lowest positions in the league would be appropriate, and split the lead into three paras. Jezhotwells (talk) 17:40, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I've expanded the lead with some more details of the course of the season. Mattythewhite (talk) 18:59, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references):
 * I repaired a large number of redirects using CheckLinks, which I recommend as a useful tool. The BBC has rearranged its servers also the Yorkshire Press. Jezhotwells (talk) 17:40, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
 * b (citations to reliable sources):
 * All good Jezhotwells (talk) 17:40, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
 * c (OR):
 * 1) It is broad in its scope.
 * 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:
 * Just a few issues mentioned above. On hold for seven days. Jezhotwells (talk) 17:40, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
 * OK, I all fixed, I am happy to pass this as a good article. If you wish to take this further to WP:FAC, I think you might want a WP:Peer review first. Congratulations and thanks for your hard work. Jezhotwells (talk) 20:18, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
 * a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):
 * b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * Just a few issues mentioned above. On hold for seven days. Jezhotwells (talk) 17:40, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
 * OK, I all fixed, I am happy to pass this as a good article. If you wish to take this further to WP:FAC, I think you might want a WP:Peer review first. Congratulations and thanks for your hard work. Jezhotwells (talk) 20:18, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Pass/Fail:
 * Just a few issues mentioned above. On hold for seven days. Jezhotwells (talk) 17:40, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
 * OK, I all fixed, I am happy to pass this as a good article. If you wish to take this further to WP:FAC, I think you might want a WP:Peer review first. Congratulations and thanks for your hard work. Jezhotwells (talk) 20:18, 2 August 2009 (UTC)