Talk:The Boat Race 1929/GA1

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

Reviewer: Caponer (talk · contribs) 19:05, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

, I will complete a comprehensive and thorough review of this article within the next 48 hours. Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns in the meantime. Thanks! -- Caponer (talk) 19:05, 26 February 2015 (UTC)


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

, I've completed my review and re-review of your article, and it meets all the criteria for Good Article status. I do however have a few comments that need to be addressed prior to its passage. -- Caponer (talk) 19:09, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose, no copyvios, 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):
 * 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:

Lede
 * Per Manual of Style/Lead section, the lede properly summarizes content from all sections of the article.
 * I suggest adding to the lead that the victory by Cambridge was their sixth consecutive victory, the tenth in the previous eleven years, was the fastest winning time since the 1924 race, and the ninth fastest time in the history of the event.
 * The lede is otherwise written well, its contents are internally-cited and verifiable, and I have no further comments, questions, or suggestions.

Background
 * The caricature of Harcourt Gilbey Gold has been released into the public domain and is therefore available for use here.
 * This section is written well, its contents are internally-cited and verifiable, and I have no further comments, questions, or suggestions.

Crews
 * Following this article's passage, I suggest keeping an eye open for an image of one of the crew members to be placed to the right of the table.
 * The table is beautifully formatted and all its contents are sourced by inline citations.
 * This section is written well, its contents are internally-cited and verifiable, and I have no further comments, questions, or suggestions.

Race
 * The Championship Course map product is licensed CC BY-SA 3.0 and is therefore free to use here.
 * Wiki-link Middlesex and Surrey.
 * This section is written well, its contents are internally-cited and verifiable, and I have no further comments, questions, or suggestions.


 * Hi Caponer, thanks again for yet another review! I've addressed all the issues you've asked me to look at.  You requested the stations be wikilinked, I haven't done that before but happy to do that from now  on, it just means I need to fix the other 160 articles!  Cheers.  The Rambling Man (talk) 19:23, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
 * The Rambling Man, I apologize for not catching this before, but both should be wiki-linked as they are not high-level place names that are universally recognized by readers. I appreciate all your continued hard work on this series and look forward to reviewing another of your articles soon. I hereby pass this to Good Article status! -- Caponer (talk) 19:28, 26 February 2015 (UTC)