Talk:Andorra at the 2014 Winter Paralympics

Andorra at the 2014 Winter Paralympics 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: May 10, 2018. (Reviewed version).

European Microstates: Andorra Low‑importance

	Europe portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject European Microstates, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of European Microstates 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.European MicrostatesWikipedia:WikiProject European MicrostatesTemplate:WikiProject European MicrostatesEuropean Microstates articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Andorra portal This article is supported by WikiProject Andorra.

Olympics: Paralympics Low‑importance

	Olympic Games portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Olympics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Olympics 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.OlympicsWikipedia:WikiProject OlympicsTemplate:WikiProject OlympicsOlympics articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is within the scope of the Paralympics task force. For more information, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Andorra at the 2014 Winter Paralympics/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Kees08 (talk · contribs) 18:58, 8 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.	Typo: Fernandex
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.
2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.
	2b. 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).
	2c. it contains no original research.
	2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.	Flag rationale is fine.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	I also found no free images
	7. Overall assessment.

Well I think you can gather why he did not finish the race, you might be able to cite the youtube video and say he fell and slid down the hill or something? Should at least be an external link. Kees08 (Talk) 06:52, 10 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Since the IPC posted it there, I'm fine with citing it. Done, and typo fixed, Kees08, thanks for the review! Courcelles (talk) 13:00, 10 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]