Talk:Willie Irvine/GA1

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

Reviewer: Jezhotwells (talk · contribs) 21:26, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

I shall be reviewing this article against the Good Article criteria, following its nomination for Good Article status.

Disambiguations: none found.

Linkrot: two found and tagged. Jezhotwells (talk) 21:29, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

Checking against GA criteria

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


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * Good prose, well structured.
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * Two dead links as noted above
 * Otherwise well referenced, no OR, spotchecks show sources support cites, RS, assume good faith for ofline sources.
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * Excellent coverage.
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * NPOV
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars, etc.:
 * stable
 * 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):
 * Licences and captions OK, pity there is no picture of the subject.
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * JUst relacements needed for the Lancashire Telegraph article which is not archived at the Internet Archive. I expect that you can find replacements. On hold for seven days. Jezhotwells (talk) 21:46, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
 * User:Arbero fixed the dead links; the website had just moved the pages. I didn't realise and messed things up, but it's all fixed now. Thanks for the review, just let me know if anything else needs fixing. Cheers, Big  Dom  09:45, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
 * OK, all good now, happy to list. Jezhotwells (talk) 13:56, 28 December 2011 (UTC)