Jump to content

Talk:Fred Keenor/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

Reviewer: Jaguar (talk · contribs) 19:05, 24 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Hi, I will be reviewing this against the GA criteria as part of a GAN sweep. I'll leave some comments soon. JAGUAR  19:05, 24 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguations: No links found.

Linkrot: No linkrot found in this article.

Checking against the GA criteria

[edit]
GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose, no copyvios, spelling and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
    "He began his football career at his hometown club Cardiff City after impressing in a trial match in 1912 that was organised by his former schoolteacher" - who did he impress?
    The infobox image needs a caption
    "Keenor, himself a patriotic man" - try himself a patriot instead
    "made 21 appearances in the league during the season, scoring 2 goals" - two goals
    "being transported to an army hospital in Dublin, Ireland" - no need to have 'Ireland' here, I'm sure everybody knows Dublin
    " After the Final, Keenor stated: "Just because we lost in our very first Cup Final, I don't think there is any cause to get down in the mouth. I can say here and now that one day soon our followers can be sure that Cardiff City will bring that cup to Wales."" - any reason why this quote is italicised?
    The 'general' subsection in the references should be renamed "bibliography" preferably, but feel free to ignore
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
    No original research found.
  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 fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:

The article is well written, comprehensive, and all of the sources check out fine. Once all of those minor prose issues I listed have dealt with then this should pass. It's been a pleasure to review this. JAGUAR  16:54, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Jaguar: Thanks very much for the review, I think I've fixed all those points. Kosack (talk) 17:23, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for that! I've checked through the article again and am happy that this meets the criteria now. Well done JAGUAR  17:24, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]