Talk:2005 Sugar Bowl/GA1
GA Review
[edit]GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
This article is in decent shape, but it needs more work before it becomes a Good Article.
- 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:
- The article tends to have "red links", if they don't have articles, it would be best to un-link them, per here.
- Check. -- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 23:44, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
- The article tends to have "red links", if they don't have articles, it would be best to un-link them, per here.
- A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
- 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):
- In the Post-game effects section, does Reference 65 cover this ---> "and several juniors elected to enter the 2005 NFL Draft as well"?
- Check. -- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 23:44, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
- In the Post-game effects section, does Reference 65 cover this ---> "and several juniors elected to enter the 2005 NFL Draft as well"?
- C. It contains no original research:
- D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:
- A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:
- 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):
- A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:
- Is it neutral?
- It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
- It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
- Is it stable?
- It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
- It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
- 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:
Not a problem, but if images can be found, they should be added.
- A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:
- Overall:
- Pass or Fail:
- If the statements above can be answered, I will pass the article. Good luck with improving this article! Also, contact me if the above statements are answered.
- Pass or Fail:
-- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 02:03, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
- Thank you to JKBrooks for getting the stuff I left at the talk page, because I have gone off and placed the article as GA. Congrats. ;) -- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 23:44, 5 July 2008 (UTC)