Talk:The Boat Races 2015/GA1

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

Reviewer: Hawkeye7 (talk · contribs) 22:02, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria


 * 1) Is it reasonably well written?
 * A. Prose is "clear and concise", without copyvios, or spelling and grammar errors:
 * B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
 * A few quibbles.
 * "The Autumn reception" Per MOS:SEASON, "autumn" should not be capitalised.
 * Done. The Rambling Man (talk) 07:51, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
 * "headstart" should "head start"
 * Done. The Rambling Man (talk) 07:51, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
 * "fightback" should be "fight back"
 * "fightback" is okay in British English. The Rambling Man (talk) 07:51, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
 * "p.m" should be "p.m." or "pm" per MOS:TIME (multiple times)
 * Made consistent to "p.m." The Rambling Man (talk) 07:51, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
 * "Rachel Quarrell, the former Oxford cox" Link the first use of cox to Coxswain (rowing)
 * Done. The Rambling Man (talk) 07:51, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Duplicated links: Boris Rankov, Molesey Boat Club (2), Goldie, stroke, Constantine Louloudis.  Hammersmith Bridge, Barnes Bridge (2), out-rating, St Paul's School
 * Done. The Rambling Man (talk) 07:51, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
 * 1) Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
 * A. Has an appropriate reference section:
 * B. Citations to reliable sources, where necessary:
 * All the links are good, a benefit of getting the article reviewed quickly
 * C. No original research:
 * 1) Is it broad in its coverage?
 * A. Major aspects:
 * B. Focused (see summary style):
 * A fine, well-written account
 * 1) Is it neutral?
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * No edit wars, etc:
 * 1) Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
 * A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
 * All images appropriately tagged. A lot of good images by and . Well done there!
 * B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * Pretty good overall.
 * A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
 * All images appropriately tagged. A lot of good images by and . Well done there!
 * B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * Pretty good overall.
 * Pretty good overall.


 * Thanks for the review, much appreciated. I believe I've addressed your comments, but do let me know if there's anything else I can do.  The Rambling Man (talk) 07:51, 16 April 2015 (UTC)

Images and Good article criteria
Perhaps Hawkeye7 was just being courteous about images? Having uploaded mine to Commons as PD or CC-by-SA of course I've no right to object to en.wikipedia editors assessing them in context, whether or not I participated in how they were used. Nevertheless I want to make it crystal clear that I take no part in enwiki's somewhat incestuous Good article (GA), In the News (ITN) and Did you know (DYK) how boring we are processes. Scoring points that way has never been my motivation for improving articles, I promise. - Pointillist (talk) 23:01, 15 April 2015 (UTC)