Talk:Christian Ehrhoff/GA1
GA Review
[edit]Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: -- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 16:11, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
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:
In the San Jose Sharks section, "Ehrhoff made his NHL debut on October 9, 2003 against the Edmonton Oilers" ---> "Ehrhoff made his NHL debut on October 9, 2003, against the Edmonton Oilers", commas after dates, if using MDY. Same section, you have "Edmonton Oilers" linked twice, and you only need it linked once.- Check.
- 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:
Reference 62 is missing Publisher info. There's a dead link.- Half-check.
- Check.
- Half-check.
- 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:
- 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:
- A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:
- Overall:
- Pass or Fail:
- Not that much to do. If the above query can be dealt with, I will pass the article. Good luck!
- Pass or Fail:
-- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 16:11, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
- All my concerns have been addressed, and I have gone off and placed the article as GA. Congrats. ;) -- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 14:38, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
- ThinkBlue, I think you've passed at least half of my GA's so far.. thanks a bunch. Cheers. Orlandkurtenbach (talk) 06:28, 21 July 2010 (UTC)