Talk:James Nesbitt/GA1

GA Review[edit]

GA review (see here for criteria)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose): b (MoS):
Definitely the strongest part of the article excellently written and flows well.
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
~~At the very least the claims regarding "wokring on the arched eyebrows" are not supported by either citation~~ although sources are reliable although the most "controversial" statement regarding cocaine is well sourced
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
Nothing obvious stands out as NPOV
It is stable.
No edit wars etc.:
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):
Both non free images properly tagged
Overall:
Pass/Fail:
~~Currently requires fixing of sources or removal of claims in lead, otherwise will pass~~ Passed! BigHairRef | Talk 00:31, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Response The "arched eyebrow" bit is supported by both citations:

Rees: "Many of Nesbitt's career choices have been devoted to the cause of proving that there is more to him than an arched eyebrow and a knowing twinkle"
Dowle: "Nesbitt laughs when I suggest that it is all in the wicked way he uses his eyebrows. "I did a lot of work on my eyebrow at grammar school to impress the girls and I knew it would come in useful one day," he says.

Bradley0110 (talk) 17:02, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

:I've put the above Dowle quote as a ref after the eyebrow sentence. There is no link to the article on the Times website (unless it's in their subscription archive). I found the article on Lexis Nexis. If there are any other ambiguous refs please say so. :) Bradley0110 (talk) 09:40, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed the sentence altogether; it isn't mentioned or elaborated on in the main article, so just looks shoehorned into the lead. Bradley0110 (talk) 15:37, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]