Talk:Seattle Sounders FC/GA1

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

Hello. I am going to be reviewing this article, however, I will seek a second opinion when I'm finished as this is my first review ever. Thank you. MobileSnail 15:00, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Quick fail criteria

 * 1) Has reliable sources Symbol support vote.svg
 * 2) Is written neutrally Symbol support vote.svg
 * 3) No valid cleanup tags Symbol support vote.svg
 * 4) Is relatively stable with no edit wars Symbol support vote.svg
 * 5) Not specifically concerned with a rapidly unfolding current event with a definite endpoint Symbol support vote.svg
 * Seattle Sounders FC passes the quick fail criteria. The full review will be conducted soon. MobileSnail 15:00, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Full review
Here we go...
 * 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: Pass
 * 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: Pass
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail: Pass


 * Comments
 * All in all, this article is very well done and is very much deserving of a Good Article status.
 * Therefore, I myself have passed the article, however I will be seeking a second opinion on the final decision. MobileSnail 16:57, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
 * As per your request I have given the article a "once-over" and can't find any real faults; I'm generally impressed with the quality. I have noticed some minor flaws with spacing etc. so it would be worth runnning through the article briefly; I've ammended a couple myself. MasterOfHisOwnDomain (talk) 21:45, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Since MobileSnail appears to be having a short wikibreak, with no contributions made in almost two weeks, I shall be passing the article so that there are no further delays. MasterOfHisOwnDomain (talk) 07:50, 3 August 2009 (UTC)