Talk:Smokers v Non-Smokers/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Cliftonian (talk · contribs) 11:38, 12 September 2013 (UTC) Oh, this does look like fun. I'll review this shortly. —Cliftonian (talk) 11:38, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

---

From first glance this looks pretty solid, and quite entertaining to boot. I'll make notes as I go through.

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose is clear and concise, without copyvios, or spelling and grammar errors:

   I have copy-edited here and there but nothing major. Generally looks very good.

   B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. Has an appropriate reference section:

   B. Citation to reliable sources where necessary:

   C. No original research:

   All very well done.

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   B. Focused:

   No issues.

4. Is it neutral?

   Fair representation without bias:

5. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

   A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:

   B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:

   Very good. I tweaked one of the captions a little bit.

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

   A comfortable GA for sure. A fine article, an interesting bit of cricketing history and a great little read—very well done indeed. —Cliftonian (talk) 12:12, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

• Bonus comments, for further improvement beyond GA:

• Is it recorded what inspired Walker to choose Smokers and Non-Smokers as the theme for the first game?
• Did the team selection in each game actually reflect who did and didn't smoke?
• Is it recorded who ultimately got the ball from the second game?

• Well done again. —Cliftonian (talk) 12:24, 12 September 2013 (UTC)