Talk:Michael Plumb/GA1

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: MathewTownsend (talk · contribs) 00:05, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'll review this shortly. MathewTownsend (talk) 00:05, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

GA review-see WP:WIAGA for criteria (and here for what they are not)

Is it reasonably well written?
A. Prose: clear and concise, correct spelling and grammar:
I have made a few minor edits which you are free to change.[1]

B. Complies with MoS for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
A. Provides references to all sources:

B. Provides in-line citations from reliable sources where necessary:

C. No original research:
Is it broad in its coverage?
A. Main aspects are addressed:
Article lacks any sense of the subject's personality or style, or specifics of his riding abilities.

I have a suggestion. Since the article is a little dry - no images - nothing about his personality, riding style etc., it would help to give quotes by others about him. e.g. from [2] which has a number of quotes by others (or by him) that give a flavor of his riding style and insight into his effect on others.

This would also give the article a dimension that is missing: there is no "feel" for the man.
B. Remains focused:
Does it follow the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
Is it stable?
No edit wars, etc:
Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
No images

B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
Overall:
Pass or Fail:

I will put this review on hold while my suggestion is evaluated.

MathewTownsend (talk) 15:21, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the review, Mathew! I am just about to leave the house, but will work on these suggestions when I get back this evening. Dana boomer (talk) 15:35, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again Mathew - I have looked over your edits and they look good. Between User:Montanabw and I, I think we have cooked up a paragraph (which I have put in the "Other" section for now) about his personality. Let us know if this was what you had in mind, or if you think there is a better place in the article for this information. Thanks, Dana boomer (talk) 02:13, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

All problems fixed. I changed the heading to "Influence" but if you don't like that, feel free to change it back.
Article PASS! MathewTownsend (talk) 20:26, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Influence is good - I wasn't really fond of "Other" but didn't have any bright ideas for what to change it to. Thanks again for the review and pass! Dana boomer (talk) 20:45, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]