Talk:Ryan Burge (footballer)/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Jezhotwells (talk • contribs • count) 18:29, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

I shall be reviewing this article against the Good Article criteria, following its nomination for Good Article status.

Disambiguations: no dabs found

Linkrot: no dead links found. Jezhotwells (talk) 18:34, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

Checking against GA criteria

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

   After recovering from numerous injury problems Burge soon became established in the middle of midfield Can you rephrase this - it reads rather clumsily.

   Burge told the press he enjoyed his experience at Japan as the clubs there appreciate inexperienced but technical players, as "they don’t just go for big lumps that head it and kick people". also clumsy as - as

   Otherwise prose passes muster, but there is room for improvement.

   Lead, this doesn't fully summarise the article - the style of play and personal life sections aren't covered. See WP:LEAD

I have tried to resolve these issues.--EchetusXe 20:00, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

1. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

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

   There is a citation needed tag outstanding from July

   Otherwise sources check out.

Information was added by Burge himself, but I removed it as it was merely trivia anyway.--EchetusXe 20:00, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

1. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   As broad as is possible for a player with only 23 appearances to date.

2. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

3. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

4. 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):

   no images used

5. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   On hold for seven days. Jezhotwells (talk) 18:56, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

   OK, this is good to go. Passing as GA. Congratulations!

Hello again! Not quite as detailed as Stanley Matthews, but I attempted to resolve the issues you found.--EchetusXe 20:00, 11 September 2011 (UTC)