Talk:Patrick Grant (designer)/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: The Rambling Man (talk · contribs) 16:14, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Ordinarily and properly, the lead should contain nothing that's not expanded upon in the main body of the article. Hence we wouldn't expect to see references in the lead as they will be used to verify the information in the main body.
I don't see "reinvent" in ref [3].
"ready to wear" should be hyphenated.
I'm not sure we should be relying on the Daily Mail as a perfectly reliable source, it's borderline tabloid.
"an MBA from Said Business School in Oxford." expand MBA for non-experts.
"Saïd Business School " has a diacritic.
"Grant is a media figure in his own right." unnecessary as it's explained subsequently.
"joining Barnard Castle School as a boarding pupil. At Barnard Castle" quick repeat of "Barnard Castle" could be avoided.
You sure it was "material sciences" and not "materials science"?
"replicable?".[12][11]" order the refs numerically.
"Grant learned that" learnt?
"Further reading: Norton & Sons" usually we use {{main}} for this kind of thing.
"In April 2013 it was announced..." well it's July now, do we have an update?
Looks like ref 2 is self-published and promotional, not neutral in any way. Can you advise?
début doesn't need the accent.
"he is hopeful that another series will be commissioned" sure he is, it'll keep him in a job. Is this really necessary for an encyclopedic article?
"has travelled extensively", "A keen sportsman"... somewhat hagiographical.
References should have publisher names, and/or work names, and/or author names.
Ref 9 appears to be written by the subject himself, how can we rely on this information?
Is it Daily Telegraph or The Daily Telegraph?
Check ref titles meet WP:DASH and use spaced en-dashes rather than spaced hyphens.
What is the benefit of the "video feature" as an external link?

A lot to do so I'll fail the GA for now, and happily re-review it should my concerns be addressed (or happily allow another editor to review it should it be re-nominated.) The Rambling Man (talk) 17:39, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]