Talk:Katherine Reutter/GA1

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

Reviewer: Nosleep  ( Talk  ·  Contribs ) 21:44, 1 August 2010 (UTC) –Grondemar 04:38, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

I'm going to withdraw as reviewer. I don't think I can fairly assess whether such a short article meets the GA criteria. I would never list it, but that doesn't mean that's the right decision. Nosleep ( Talk  ·  Contribs ) 05:14, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

I'll pick this up. I'll attempt to complete the review in the next few days. –Grondemar 04:38, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

I've reviewed the article, and have the following concerns I'd like to see addressed before I pass it as a good article:


 * A couple of the references are deadlinks. Could you either repair them or find a new source?  I'd also accept a reference to the original newspaper if you can determine the section and page.
 * It may be a good idea, to prevent future deadlinks, to archive the web-accessible references. I recommend WebCite. Note this isn't required to pass, however.
 * It would be nice to have a photo of her for the article. I noticed that she had an email address on the linked website; could you try contacting her and seeing if she would be willing to freely license a photo we could use?

Note I'm not particularly concerned with the length of the article; it's short but appears to cover all needed information, and is comparable to other Good Articles on Olympic athletes such as Carmelo Camet.


 * GA review (see here for criteria)


 * 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):
 * 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 article will be on hold for a minimum of seven days to allow the above concerns to be addressed.
 * 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 article will be on hold for a minimum of seven days to allow the above concerns to be addressed.
 * This article will be on hold for a minimum of seven days to allow the above concerns to be addressed.

Thank you. –Grondemar 23:10, 11 August 2010 (UTC)




 * Hello and thank you for your review. I've replaced the dead links.  The references I added to her personal life section covers 2005-2007 well so I think those are good enough.  I also added a website that lists all her sponsors.  Thanks for pointing out that tool, I will definitely used that for my future edits.  I just sent an e-mail to Katherine Reutter so I'm hoping to get a response from her soon.  I already checked Flickr and nothing was available.  I think I've addressed all your concerns. If I missed something, please tell me.  Thank you.Philipmj24 (talk) 01:34, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
 * One thing I noticed with the way you added the new references: when using WebCite with, you want to keep the original URL in the "url=" field, and place the WebCite URL in the "archiveurl=" field.  You also want to add the "archivedate=" property, which is when you uploaded the webpage in the WebCite archive.  For examples of how this would look like filled out, you can look at 2009 International Bowl, an article I recently got passed as a Featured Article.  You can see all the references by clicking the Edit button on the References section, since I used list-defined references.


 * With the assumption that this last minor thing will be corrected, I'm going to go ahead and pass this article as a Good Article.  Congratulations! –Grondemar 02:43, 12 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks man! Just corrected that minor thing (if I missed something please tell me). Again, thanks for that website reference, it's going to change the way I edit Wikipedia from now on!Philipmj24 (talk) 02:12, 13 August 2010 (UTC)