Talk:Amanda Carter/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Miyagawa (talk · contribs) 10:55, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

Will review later on today (after I get back from the Vikings v Steelers game at Wembley). Miyagawa (talk) 10:55, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the reminder, I'd completed forgotten! I'll get onto this. Miyagawa (talk) 09:51, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

• Ok, I'm now reviewing. The article is in good shape and I don't see it being very far at all from being a fairly straight forward GA pass. I'll do the minor copyedits myself as they're rather niggily and so far just seem to be to avoid the repetition of words.

• National team: "The Canadian player who knocked her down tried to block the way for Australian officials to help her up." Two things - can we specify which Canadian player it was, and also, if we can - you will want to put a direct citation after the sentence due to the BIO issues.

  Y My word yes. It was Tracey Ferguson, and she even has an article. Done. Hawkeye7 (talk) 10:54, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

• The only other thing, is that I'd suggest you create an external links section and move the commons link box down to that. It looks rather odd sitting in the statistics section.

  Y Done. Hawkeye7 (talk) 10:54, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

• Images are all present and correct, everything is cited. I only ended up making a couple of edits for repetitive words (but then again, how many different ways can you say Paralympic Games anyway?). So all good. Once those two points are addressed, I think this one will be fit for a upgrade to GA status. Miyagawa (talk) 10:11, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

  All points addressed. Hawkeye7 (talk) 10:54, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

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):

   Meets all requirements.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

   All sources are reliable and suitably used.

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   Broad in coverage, while focused on the subject.

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

   Neutral, and cited as appropriate.

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):

   All images are suitably used.

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   Happy to promote this one as a GA. Good job. Miyagawa (talk) 11:09, 6 October 2013 (UTC)