Talk:Jeff White (Australian footballer)/GA1

GA Review

Personal life

• "He has recently launched a sports classified website, SponsorThem, which is a specialised networking site for athletes." Recently needs to be changed to provide an exact date. Recently means nothing and dates the sentence.

Melbourne

• "His Round 6 performance against Carlton is also noted as one of his career-best performances." It's probably worth saying why it was one of his best. What did he do?

General

• Numbers and units need to be broken by a non-breaking space, e.g. 13 matches.
• It might be worth including details of how well his sides have done, as well as his own personal success.

Overall, it's a very good article and a very good read. I'll put it on hold for the above points to be addressed or for your comments. Peanut4 (talk) 17:47, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments. I will edit the article accordingly when I have more time, probably tomorrow. Cheers. Rusty8 (talk) 13:42, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Ok I have fixed the Personal life and Melbourne sections as per the above suggestions, and added in some non-breaking spaces throughout the article, though I'm not certain of where these should be placed and where not. Rusty8 (talk) 06:14, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Most has been done. But could you add info of how well his sides have done, to add to his own personal career. Peanut4 (talk) 23:42, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Hey, yes will add in that info in the coming day or two, can definitely see places for that to be added, and it would add some context to the article overall too. Will do that as soon as I've got time. Cheers, Rusty8 (talk) 18:27, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Ok should be all done now! :D Think I've mentioned how his teams have performed for each season, some more detailed than others, but I have gone in to detail when warranted, I feel. Cheers, Rusty8 (talk) 16:30, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

• I've made some minor changes. Can you just check to see if they are okay.

• Secondly, I think now the lead needs to be a bit longer per WP:LEAD. It should probably be two paragraphs long though you don't need to add an entirely new one the same size as the current one.

• Everything else looks great now. Good work. Peanut4 (talk) 23:53, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

The changes you made are all fine. I will look at the lead later today. Cheers. Rusty8 (talk) 06:56, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

Have broken up the lead in to two paragraphs but didn't add in too many extra words - does it need to be beefed up, or is it ok as is?? Rusty8 (talk) 16:22, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

Once you've broken it up, it actually looks pretty much spot on. And if you feel there's nothing you want to add, then I'll be guided by that gut instinct, because you're probably the best judge.

Very good work, and I think this is now a smashing GA. Good luck with any future expansion or work on the article. Meets all the GA criteria and more now.

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   Peanut4 (talk) 17:36, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

That's awesome, and thank you very much for the effort you have put in to this as well. Cheers! Rusty8 (talk) 08:18, 23 October 2008 (UTC)