Talk:Ian Helliwell

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleIan Helliwell has been listed as one of the Sports and recreation good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
June 15, 2010Good article nomineeListed

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Ian Helliwell (footballer)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 15:32, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

  1. Is it well written?
    A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
    Well done.
    B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
  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:
    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):
    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:
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:
    I have gone off and passed the article to GA, as I did not find anything troubling while reading the article. I would like to thank Mattythewhite for doing a fine job with describing the background and stuff. Congratulations on the hard effort. If you feel that this review is in error, feel free to take it to a GA review.

--  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 15:32, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]