Talk:Smokers v Non-Smokers/GA1

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: Cliftonian (talk · contribs) 11:38, 12 September 2013 (UTC) Oh, this does look like fun. I'll review this shortly. —Cliftonian (talk) 11:38, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

From first glance this looks pretty solid, and quite entertaining to boot. I'll make notes as I go through.

Is it reasonably well written?
A. Prose is clear and concise, without copyvios, or spelling and grammar errors:
I have copy-edited here and there but nothing major. Generally looks very good.

B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
A. Has an appropriate reference section:

B. Citation to reliable sources where necessary:

C. No original research:
All very well done.
Is it broad in its coverage?
A. Major aspects:

B. Focused:
No issues.
Is it neutral?
Fair representation without bias:
Is it stable?
No edit wars, etc:
Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:

B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
Very good. I tweaked one of the captions a little bit.
Overall:
Pass or Fail:
A comfortable GA for sure. A fine article, an interesting bit of cricketing history and a great little read—very well done indeed. —Cliftonian (talk) 12:12, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Is it recorded what inspired Walker to choose Smokers and Non-Smokers as the theme for the first game?
Did the team selection in each game actually reflect who did and didn't smoke?
Is it recorded who ultimately got the ball from the second game?

Well done again. —Cliftonian (talk) 12:24, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]