Talk:Victoria Pendergast/GA1

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

Reviewer: Jaguar (talk · contribs) 17:10, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

I'll take up this review as part of the chain of Paralympians submitted in past few days. I mainly focus on copy editing issues. Given the size of these articles the GAR itself should not take too long so I will leave down some initial comments on these articles within 48 hours. Thanks! ☠ Jag  uar  ☠ 17:10, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
 * 1) Is it reasonably well written?
 * A. Prose quality:
 * B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
 * 1) Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
 * A. References to sources:
 * B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
 * C. No original research:
 * 1) Is it broad in its coverage?
 * A. Major aspects:
 * B. Focused:
 * 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 copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
 * B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * No edit wars, etc:
 * 1) Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
 * A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
 * B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * Pass or Fail:

Lead

 * The lead is slightly too short for a GA - could this be expanded a bit to explain some details?
 * ✅ Expanded the lead. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:25, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

Athletics

 * F58 leads to a disambiguation. For readers unfamiliar with this, what does F58 mean?
 * ✅ Added a bit of explanation. I have until mid-2016 to get the athletics classification articles into shape. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:25, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
 * This section is far too short as well - can it either be expanded a little or merged with another section somehow?
 * ✅ Merged with previous section. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:25, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

Skiing

 * "she is suited to sit-skiing and embraced the idea of hurtling down a mountain at 80 kilometres per hour (50 mph) in a custom built sled" - is this a fact? Is she thinking of doing this idea or did she actually do it?
 * ✅ Yes. Deleted "the idea of". Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:25, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
 * "She competed in two events, coming 7th in women's slalom" - 'coming' --> 'finishing'?
 * ✅ Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:25, 13 April 2014 (UTC)


 * All points addressed. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:25, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

On hold
All references are in check and except from the issues I have mentioned above this article has a good shot of becoming a Good Article. The only things standing in the way are the general length (such as the Athletics section) and some prose issues. I'll put this on hold for seven days until those issues have been addressed to! Thank you ☠ Jag  uar  ☠ 19:05, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

Close - promoted
Thank you for addressing those concerns so quickly! The article now meets the GA criteria. The prose, lead and references are now all in good standing. I'll get to reviewing the rest of the Paralympians shortly. ☠ Jag  uar  ☠ 22:31, 13 April 2014 (UTC)