Talk:Steffen Peters
Appearance
Steffen Peters has been listed as one of the Sports and recreation good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. Review: July 5, 2013. (Reviewed version). |
A fact from Steffen Peters appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 10 June 2013 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
GA Review
[edit]GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
- This review is transcluded from Talk:Steffen Peters/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: The Rambling Man (talk · contribs) 16:56, 30 June 2013 (UTC)
Comments
- Where is his birth date referenced?
- Reference #1 in the Personal life section, directly after the sentence that states this information. - DB
- " in the sport of " not sure you need "the sport of".
- "who competes" followed by "he competes". Ok, so it's not FAC but repetitive prose is repetitive.
- I'm not sure but I thought US convention these days on "Peters'" would be "Peters's".
- Really? I was always taught "Peters'". After taking a quick look, the style guides appear to disagree and be completely inconsistent on this issue - some say use the extra "s", some say don't. If you don't have a major problem with it, I'd prefer to leave it was it is. - DB
- "he was unable to have his citizenship papers processed in time to " -> "however his citizenship papers were not processed in time"
- "and so was not a member of the team in Barcelona" -> "and so did not compete in Barcelona" (just trying to tighten this prose a little).
- What's a "top horse"?
- "for the 2008 Summer Olympics.[10] In individual dressage competition at the 2008 Summer Olympics in Beijing," repetitive and badly linked.
- I'm not sure exactly what you were going for here, but I've made some tweaks to the wording and linking. - DB
- " of the prestigious German" POV creeping in here?
- I don't think so... This is a huge international competition, and of huge importance. It's not the Olympics or World Equestrian Games, but it's not a backyard show either. - DB
- Check refs for WP:DASH and ensure all available fields are used (like
accessdate
.
- I think I've addressed the dash issues, and as far as I know all necessary fields are used for the references. Access dates are not needed for print journal articles where the link is provided as a courtesy. - DB
The Rambling Man (talk) 17:06, 30 June 2013 (UTC)
- Thank you very much for the review, TRM. These comments look fairly easy to address, and I should have a chance to do so this evening. Dana boomer (talk) 11:48, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
- No worries, indeed they are mainly trivial. Let me know when you're ready for a re-review. Best, The Rambling Man (talk) 16:29, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
- OK, a bit late, but I think I've addressed everything above. I've left comments where I had comments/clarifications, and otherwise just addressed your comments without leaving a response. Please let me know if you see further work that needs to be done. Thanks again for the review, Dana boomer (talk) 12:22, 3 July 2013 (UTC)
- No worries, indeed they are mainly trivial. Let me know when you're ready for a re-review. Best, The Rambling Man (talk) 16:29, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
Checklist
[edit]GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
- Is it reasonably well written?
- Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
- A. Has an appropriate reference section:
- B. Citation to reliable sources where necessary:
- C. No original research:
- A. Has an appropriate reference section:
- Is it broad in its coverage?
- A. Major aspects:
- B. Focused:
- A. Major aspects:
- Is it neutral?
- Fair representation without bias:
- Fair representation without bias:
- Is it stable?
- No edit wars, etc:
- No edit wars, etc:
- 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:
- A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
- Overall:
- Pass or Fail:
- Pass or Fail:
On hold pending the comments made above. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:06, 30 June 2013 (UTC)
Categories:
- Wikipedia good articles
- Sports and recreation good articles
- Wikipedia Did you know articles
- Biography articles of living people
- GA-Class biography articles
- GA-Class biography (sports and games) articles
- Low-importance biography (sports and games) articles
- Sports and games work group articles
- WikiProject Biography articles
- GA-Class equine articles
- Low-importance equine articles
- WikiProject Equine articles
- GA-Class Olympics articles
- Mid-importance Olympics articles
- WikiProject Olympics articles