Talk:2013 Cotton Bowl Classic/GA1
Appearance
GA Review
[edit]GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Toa Nidhiki05 (talk · contribs) 17:34, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
I'll review this article. Toa Nidhiki05 17:34, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
- It is reasonably well written.
- It is factually accurate and verifiable.
- a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
- There are a couple sections that need citations. The second paragraphs of both the Texas A&M and Oklahoma sections need citations since they are statistics or facts. The first two on each of those are fine. Done --Go Phightins! 01:43, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
- a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
- It is broad in its coverage.
- a (major aspects): b (focused):
- Article covers all required information and stays on topic
- a (major aspects): b (focused):
- It follows the neutral point of view policy.
- Fair representation without bias:
- No issues here.
- Fair representation without bias:
- It is stable.
- No edit wars, etc.:
- No edit wars of note. Article is stable and unlikely to change.
- No edit wars, etc.:
- 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):
- Quick passing as there are no images.
- a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
- Overall:
I will pass this once the citation issues are fixed.Passed! Good job, and keep up the good work. :)- Pass/Fail:
- Pass/Fail: