Talk:The Boat Race 1862

The Boat Race 1862 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.
Review: December 29, 2014. (Reviewed version).

Rowing

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Rowing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of rowing on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.RowingWikipedia:WikiProject RowingTemplate:WikiProject Rowingrowing articles

To-do list:

Featured Articles:

Raise the rowing (sport) article to featured status.
1. Get article relisted to 'good article status'
2. Put through another round of peer review, see here
3. Nominate for featured status
Ditto for Henley Royal Regatta, The Boat Race , Steve Redgrave

Stubs: see here..

Tag {{Rowing-stub}} onto all rowing stub articles so we can keep track of them.
Expand stubs to at least start class.

Image requests: see here..
Article requests: see here..

Write bios for World Rowing champions (see the redlinks in the templates)

Document FISA database errors

University of Cambridge

This article is within the scope of the University of Cambridge Wikiproject, an attempt to improve articles relating to the University of Cambridge, and to standardize and extend the coverage of the University in the encyclopedia. If you would like to participate, you can help us by editing the article attached to this notice, or you could visit the project page, where you can join the project, learn more about it, see what needs to be done, or contribute to the discussion.University of CambridgeWikipedia:WikiProject University of CambridgeTemplate:WikiProject University of CambridgeUniversity of Cambridge articles

University of Oxford Low‑importance

	University of Oxford portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject University of Oxford, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the University of Oxford on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.University of OxfordWikipedia:WikiProject University of OxfordTemplate:WikiProject University of OxfordUniversity of Oxford articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

London Low‑importance

	London portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject London, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of London on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LondonWikipedia:WikiProject LondonTemplate:WikiProject LondonLondon-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

River Thames (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject River Thames, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.River ThamesWikipedia:WikiProject River ThamesTemplate:WikiProject River ThamesRiver Thames articles

England Low‑importance

	England portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of England on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EnglandWikipedia:WikiProject EnglandTemplate:WikiProject EnglandEngland-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

United Kingdom Low‑importance

	United Kingdom portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject United KingdomUnited Kingdom articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:The Boat Race 1862/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: 3family6 (talk · contribs) 20:56, 23 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Is it reasonably well written?
A. Prose is "clear and concise", without copyvios, or spelling and grammar errors:
I did not see any copyvios in the online articles, or in the one book cited to which I have online access. The other books I'm accepting AGF on the coyvio issue. Spelling and grammar check out. My only complaint is that I didn't understand the significance of Cambridge being surrounded by the steamers. The one book that I looked at through G-books said that it is well known that once a boat is surrounded by steamers, it basically hasn't a chance of winning. Perhaps write that into the article, so that the significance is more clear?--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 18:17, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Y Done.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 20:18, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
Layout if fine, quite readable.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 18:17, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
A. Has an appropriate reference section:
Appropriate reference section, follows a consistent format.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 18:17, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

B. Citations to reliable sources, where necessary:
Well-cited, I'm accepting the offline sources AGF.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 18:17, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

C. No original research:
Well-reference, verifiable content.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 18:17, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Is it broad in its coverage?
A. Major aspects:
All major aspects are covered.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 18:17, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

B. Focused:
Focused on the subject of article.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 18:17, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Is it neutral?
Fair representation without bias:
Very neutral presentation.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 18:17, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Is it stable?
No edit wars, etc:
Highly stable, single-author article.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 18:17, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
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:
All are public domain within the US.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 18:17, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
Relevant with suitable captions.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 18:17, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Overall: Just a small question regarding readability for the non-expert reader.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 18:17, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Pass or Fail:

Cool, thanks for picking this one up, I look forward to your review. All the best, The Rambling Man (talk) 22:12, 25 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. I'm waiting for Christmas to end, then I'll try and work on this the best that I can.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 02:37, 26 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've added a referenced comment to address your outstanding concern, please let me know if you need more. Thanks for the review! The Rambling Man (talk) 19:34, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

All set. A very good article!--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 20:18, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]