Talk:Jordan Kovacs/GA1

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

Reviewer: –Grondemar 13:45, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Will complete this review in the next couple of days. –Grondemar 13:45, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

One initial comment&mdash;I haven't finished going through the article yet:
 * Were there any star ratings or other recruiting details that could be listed similar to other recruit articles? Being a walk-on with only D-II offers, I understand he might not have been graded by the services. –Grondemar 13:38, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
 * School team bios would include them and he is not listed at Scout.com or Rivals.com.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 17:33, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

More comments:
 * Under college career, the text jumps straight from Kovacs having a second knee surgery to being one of the most highly-regarded walk-ons in the country. I'd suggest adding something about the surgery being successful (I assume it was) and how he earned playing time in the offseason to fill the gap.
 * I noted that the surgery was successful, but do not understand the point about filling the gap.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 05:50, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
 * "That season he played free safety before being switched to strong safety." It would be better to indicate earlier that he made his first start as a free safety, and then indicate in which game he transitioned to strong safety.
 * I don't know which game(s) he played free safety. I have added all the detail I could find.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 08:11, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
 * It would be nice to have a picture of the subject, although of course that is not required for GA status.
 * In time, I will track one down.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 05:45, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

I made several copyedits to the text; once the above issues are addressed, I'll be happy to pass this article as a Good Article.


 * GA review (see here for criteria)


 * 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 (references): 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, 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:
 * This GAN is placed on hold pending resolution of the above issues.
 * 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:
 * This GAN is placed on hold pending resolution of the above issues.
 * This GAN is placed on hold pending resolution of the above issues.

Thank you. –Grondemar 04:20, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Looks very good; that was everything I was looking for. I will  pass this GAN at this time.  Congratulations! –Grondemar 12:48, 19 January 2011 (UTC)