Talk:Brayden Schenn/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: -- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 20:58, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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:
In the Junior section, is this right ---> "Schenn apent the 2008–09 season playing with the Wheat Kings"? Is "apent" suppose to be "spent"? Same section, shouldn't "rookie of the year and most popular player" be "Rookie of the Year and Most Popular Player"? Same section, the second "In January of 2009" should be "In the same month" or something like that, that way you avoid adding the same thing later.
Fixed those, rearranged the section with the two mentions of January so they follow each other more closely, and don't use the same phrase
Check.

B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
In the Minor section, is AAA supposed to be like this ---> 'AAA'. In the Junior section, "21, 2007 against the Saskatoon Blades" commas after dates, if using MDY. In the International section, please link "Whitehorse" to its correspondence article, as at the moment it stands out as a disambiguation. In the Junior section, add "CHL" after Canadian Hockey League, I mean I know what it means, but how 'bout your reader. Throughout the article, you need to have a consistency between "7th overall" and "fifth overall". Either spell out the number (seventh overall) or have the number (5th overall).
Also fixed these.
Half-check.
Sorry, I thought I had them all the first time. I believe I have them all now.
Check.
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:
~~Refs. 4, 9, 10, and 14 should not be in all capitals, per here. "Regina Leader-Post" and "The StarPhoenix" in Ref. 22 and 27, respectively, need to be in the "work" format.~~ There's a dead link.
I am unclear on "work" format, but have fixed the rest of the links. Also replaced the dead link with a cite from a different source
I got them. What I meant was replace the "publisher" format with "work", as Regina Leader-Post and The StarPhoenix are newspapers and need to be italicized.

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):

C. It contains no original research:

D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:
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):
Is it neutral?
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:
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:
Overall:
Pass or Fail:
If the statements above can be answered, I will pass the article. Good luck with improving this article!

-- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 20:58, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Addressed everything except the "work" format, will adjust that after clarification. Canada Hky (talk) 23:16, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

One issue left. -- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 23:49, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Got that one now too, I believe. Canada Hky (talk) 23:55, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you to Canada Hky 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) 00:13, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]