Talk:Shay Given/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review[edit]

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria


This article is in decent shape, but it needs more work before it becomes a Good Article.

  1. Is it well written?
    A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
    In the Newcastle section, this sentence in paragraph six, "Given was named in the Premier League's Team of the Season, and signed a new five-year contract with the club that summer", reads very odd. Might need to be re-written. Same section, this ---> "On 17 September 2006, Given suffered a one-centimeter tear in his bowel after a heavy challenge from West Ham United striker Marlon Harewood", what do you mean by "heavy challenge"? In the International career, this sentence ---> "Although Spain missed twice, three misses for the Irish meant that Spain went through 3–2 on penalties", needs to be re-written.
    Check. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 22:18, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
    In the lead, link "Champions League" to its correspondence article. In the Newcastle section, link "UEFA Cup" and "Manchester United" once, per here. Same section, I think you have "Arsenal", in the first paragraph, linked wrong.
    Check. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 22:18, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Is it verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check?
    A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:
    Reference 3 is missing an accessdate.
    Check. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 22:18, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    B. Reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose):
    Does Reference 3 cover all this ---> "The season prior to Given's arrival saw Blackburn win the Premier League title, and his first season at the club saw much of the title-winning team remain intact. Given was unable to oust first-choice goalkeeper and England international Tim Flowers from the team in his first year, and it was during a loan move to Swindon Town in Division Two during the first half of the 1995−96 season that Given made his professional debut. He made five appearances for the club before returning to Blackburn at the end of 1995"? Is there a source for this ---> "During the summer he competed in the 2002 World Cup, but could not prevent the Republic of Ireland being eliminated by Spain after a penalty shoot-out"?
    Check. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 22:18, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    C. It contains no original research:
    D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:
    B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
  4. Is it neutral?
    It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
  5. Is it stable?
    It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
  6. Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
    A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:
    B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
    It would be best if Image:Shay Given back 2.jpg was on the right and Image:ShayGiven.JPG was on the left, per MOS:IMAGES. Also, don't force image size.
    Check. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 22:18, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:
    If the statements above can be answered, I will pass the article. Good luck with improving this article!

--  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 17:12, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think I've addressed all of the issued raised above, thanks for taking the time to review the article! Let me know if the sentences which needed rewriting still don't make sense, I wasn't entirely clear as to which bits were confusing. Best, – Toon(talk) 21:53, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you to Toon for getting the stuff I left at the talk page, because I have gone off and placed the article as GA. Congrats. ;) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE)