Talk:Lennox Lewis vs. Mike Tyson

GA on Hold

 * 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:
 * a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * Pass/Fail:

I believe this article might qualify for quick-fail, so we'll see. iMat thew   20  08  19:10, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I believe so. Sorry, users who have worked on this article, but this article was just created, and lacks sources and needs a more neutral point of view, once these are adressed, please dont hesitate to renominate it, but for now, this article does not pass. (qualifies under quick fail criteria) ~    S    R    S    ~   19:42, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Lewis-Tyson.jpg
The image Image:Lewis-Tyson.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check


 * That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
 * That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. --02:09, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Writing
I just randomly came across this article, and am concerned about its writing quality. It is clear that it was written by someone who does not have English as their main language, and is thus very difficult to comprehend and make sense of. I suggest someone with a good grasp of English and expert knowledge on the subject rewrites such an important article. Andre666 (talk) 22:15, 30 April 2013 (UTC)