Talk:Fred Davis (snooker player)/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Boca Jóvenes (talk · contribs) 04:06, 24 October 2022 (UTC)

I'll review this. Hope to make some progress over the next two or three days. BoJó | talk UTC 04:06, 24 October 2022 (UTC)

• • Thanks for taking a look at this. :) Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 08:28, 24 October 2022 (UTC)
    • Did you have some comments for me Boca Jóvenes Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 20:10, 29 October 2022 (UTC)

Still studying this one, Lee. I should be with you soon. It is looking good, though. BoJó | talk UTC 20:16, 29 October 2022 (UTC)

Summary

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

Everything seems to be fine although there is a lot of detail and perhaps an over-reliance on Clive Everton as the main source. I was a little concerned on first reading by some of the prose in the lead and early years sections but I subsequently copyedited these myself because, once the article gets into Fred's pro career, the prose settles down and is much better. Verification is good and there no problems about original research, copyvio, neutrality or anything like that. Given Fred's very long career, the challenge had to be breadth of coverage but you've handled this well by keeping it chronological and everything is within scope. Only the one image but I agree it is fair use. I have tried to study the tables but there's a lot to take in, although there is good annotation. They are well placed, however, being below the narrative.

All in all, everything checks as a yes and this is a good article. I'm pleased about that as I remember Fred. He was always a jolly sort of a chap and a great sport. It's not surprising the audiences warmed to him. Well done. BoJó | talk UTC 22:16, 29 October 2022 (UTC)