Talk:2013–14 York City F.C. season/GA1
GA Review[edit]
| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: NickGibson3900 (Talk - Cont.)
I will review shortly
| Criteria Number | Criteria | Yes/No | Comment/s |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 a) | The prose is clear and concise, it respects copyright laws, and the spelling and grammar are correct |  |
I fixed a few minor problems |
| 1 b) | It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation | |
|
| 2 a) | It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline | |
|
| 2 b) | It provides in-line citations from reliable sources for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines | |
|
| 2 c) | It contains no original research | |
|
| 3 a) | It addresses the main aspects of the topic | |
|
| 3 b) | It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail | |
|
| 4 | It represents viewpoints fairly and without bias, giving due weight to each | |
|
| 5 | It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute | |
|
| 6 a) | Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content | |
|
| 6 b) | Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions | |
|
| Overall | Overall Yes/No | |
I am passing this article. Well done.
Suggestions for future improvements:
- Do you have a picture of the logo. Would be good if you could although it isn't essential.
- I'm afraid the logo can only be used at York City F.C. as it is non-free. And thanks for reviewing the article. Mattythewhite (talk) 21:26, 20 July 2014 (UTC)