Talk:Go (game)/GA2

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

Reviewer: ɳorɑfʈ  Talk! 00:03, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Checklist
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria


 * 1) Is it reasonably well written?
 * A. Prose quality:
 * B. MoS compliance:
 * 1) Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
 * A. References to sources:
 * B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
 * C. No original research:
 * 1) Is it broad in its coverage?
 * A. Major aspects:
 * B. Focused:
 * 1) Is it neutral?
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * No edit wars, etc:
 * 1) Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
 * A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
 * B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * No edit wars, etc:
 * 1) Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
 * A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
 * B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * Pass or Fail:

Comments
Review in process now. ɳorɑfʈ Talk! 00:03, 1 April 2010 (UTC) Review completed ɳorɑfʈ  Talk! 01:06, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
 * References 86 and 94 are dead links. ɳorɑfʈ  Talk! 00:08, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

I don't think that the Good Article criteria suggest that either measurements or pictures must follow the rsepective manual of style. it complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, jargon, words to avoid, fiction, and list incorporation

I understood that references to dead links are allowed... perhaps I am wrong. If the information was once published it can be accessed through archives.

I agree about rules and equipment, actually there is some material that should not be placed under Equipment.--ZincBelief (talk) 14:48, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Outside view
I agree with the basic issue, but actually think the Rules section isn't bad at present. Equipment definitely could use trimming. hamiltonstone (talk) 01:44, 1 April 2010 (UTC)