Talk:Patrick Keogh/GA1

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

Reviewer: Kaiser matias (talk · contribs) 23:02, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

Give me a day or two to properly go over this. Kaiser matias (talk) 23:02, 24 February 2017 (UTC)


 * GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):  d (copyvio and plagiarism):
 * 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 and other media, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:

I'll note I'm not overtly familiar with rugby, but reading the article I found nothing that was too confusing or overtly full or jargon, or otherwise linked, which is good.


 * "The final team consisted of 26 players and toured New Zealand before departing to Melbourne, although Keogh was the last to join, and actually played for Otago against the team prior to their departure." The note about Keogh being the last to join reads really awkwardly here, and considering the preceding paragraph notes he was the last "pakeha" to join the team, I feel the two things (while I realize they aren't exactly the same) could be merged someone just for smoother reading.
 * "... played in at least 60 of the side's 74 matches in the British Isles. The schedule was grueling, with the 74 matches played in only 175 days." The repetition of 74 matches here should be fixed.
 * "The tour was not without controversy for Keogh, on the Queensland leg of the tour, and playing against the state side, Keogh, along with a number of other players, were accused of "playing stiff"—intentionally playing to lose. Don't need to repeat Keogh's name here again, and could do with a semi-colon after the first use of his name to break up the run-on sentence.
 * "Keogh had played in at least 70 of the 107 matches on tour, including at least 60 in the British Isles, and 9 in Australia." It's already noted prior that he played at least 60 matches in Britain, so don't need to repeat it.
 * Other than those minor writing aspects, the article is good. Like that there are some contemporary sources used as well as what looks like reputable publications. Really interesting article, and once the above are cleared up I'll give it a pass. Kaiser matias (talk) 23:27, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Hey. Thanks for your review, I really appreciate it. I've been hectically busy lately so I was wondering if you'd mind if I wait until the weekend to address your comments. I'd like to address them properly and it'll hopefully only take me 30 minutes, but I just can't find the time until then. Hopefully this suits you. Thanks. -- Shudde  talk 21:01, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Hey no worries, just let me know when you get to it; would hate to fail it for something like that. Kaiser matias (talk) 00:56, 1 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Hey. I think I've addressed your comments (and ahead of schedule!). Hopefully you're happy with the changes, but if you have any problems do let me know. Thanks. -- Shudde  talk 18:42, 2 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Looks good, a well-written article. Kaiser matias (talk) 22:34, 2 March 2017 (UTC)