Talk:WrestleMania IX/GA1

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

Hi, I am reviewing your article for GA. I have already read through it and see no basic problems or areas in need of fixing. One question though. In the sentence "The match between the Steiner Brothers (Rick and Scott) and The Headshrinkers (Samu and Fatu) had little building,..." I assume you mean little buildup? Perhaps you should clarify or wikiling, since it sounds like jargon. &mdash; Mattisse (Talk) 21:16, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I replaced "building" (which was a typo) with "background" in order to remove the jargon. GaryColemanFan (talk) 21:26, 27 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Although you link names in the lead, perhaps you should link them at first mention in the body of the article. Granted, I am not familiar with the topic, but I had to use "find" to determine if there were links to Tatanka and Shawn Michaels in the first sentence under Background. It's up to you. Perhaps most readers are more sophisticated on the subject than I am. I have only heard of Hulk Hogan, plus some names I recognize from your last article, like Sensational Sherri.
 * Definitely a good point, especially since I wasn't even consistent with this (eg. Bret Hart was linked in both places, but Tatanka was only linked in one). I added the wikilinks to the background section. GaryColemanFan (talk) 21:46, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Final GA review (see here for criteria)

&mdash; Mattisse (Talk) 18:27, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose):Very well written. b (MoS): No obvious MoS issues
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): Well referenced b (citations to reliable sources): Sources appear reliable.  c (OR):
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): Covers the event thoroughly b (focused): Remains well focused
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias: Presents a neutral point of view
 * 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:
 * 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:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail: