(a) it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline;
(b) reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose);[2] and
The prose is really choppy. There are lots of short one sentence paragraphs. "Julia Mortimer.She likes to paint murals" Does Julia like to pain murals or does summer like to pain them? "As a former able-bodied competitive swimmer, she's annoyed by notions that Paralympic swimming is a "joke";" Who has this notation that the Paralympics are a joke?
Don't know
(b) (MoS)
Press coverage belongs on the article talk page, not on the article else. This needs to be moved. The lead is not a summary of the article and contains information not found elsewhere. It isn't clear from the text why this is necessary. Birthday information seems like it should Please explain or put all the original information in the lead into the article body, summarise the body and write a citation free lead. Lots of sentences start with Mortimer. Is this necessary? The personal section appears incomplete, starting out rather abruptly in 2008.
Don't know
(a) I've tried to fix the mural reference, but I'm not attached to keeping it. Is the "joke" reference clearer with the edits I've made? It's able-bodied swimmers (presumably in Canada) that she's heard suggest this. -- Zanimum (talk) 01:11, 17 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
(b) Moved the link to the talk page.
I'll work on the lead and articles starting with her last name tomorrow.
As for personal section, I'm a little stymied by the fact that there's zilch out there about her life pre-accident. I wanted to include info on her able-bodied swimming, seeing that she was in the Olympic trials, there should be something about her results. But her parents, when they were in contact, weren't able to offer any help to that aspect. I haven't tried Swimming Canada, to see if they can provide names of top tournaments, results, but they couldn't. Google lets you narrow web search results by date, and there's only false positives for the year range in which she would have been competing, pre-parasport. -- Zanimum (talk) 01:11, 17 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I've looked at the media guide for the Canadian Paralympic Committee and they don't have much either. If it isn't there, you can't write about it. Not a problem with GA. If there was information, it should be there. I'd make some wording changes (provided wording is supported by sources) like "She enjoys painting murals, and submitted two acrylic paintings for the Talent Supporting Talent Canadian Athlete Art Exhibit, a fundraiser at the Jane Roos Gallery, Toronto." I'd put the paragraph in "She spent six months in a" into the previous paragraph, work on fixing sentences so they don't all start with Her.
"Mortimer listens to music on an MP3 player before meets; she listens to any music, other than hardcore punk, particular upbeat songs.[31] She uses SpiderTech tape and liquid tape.[31]" If the music ties into pre-race rituals, I would move to the swimming sections. Ditto what she uses. Otherwise, this comes off as trivial. In fact, I'd likely remove the liquid tape section unless she has sponsorship from them.--LauraHale (talk) 01:00, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Little by little, random facts keep showing up in new (otherwise predictable) articles. Hopefully, something about her earlier swimming accomplishments. I've taken a different route for reformatting the info about her art. How's that look? I've done a bunch of editing to various sentences, to move her name away from the start and generally reformat. One major change was taking the 2012 London team efforts and placing them at the end of the section, as I feel there's a clear common thread that outweighs the benefits of being chronological.
It would be really nice if the raw URLs can be removed and replaced with full citations.
Don't know
(b) (citations to reliable sources)
Sources appear reliable. No references to YouTube, Twitter, Facebook; no over reliance on press releases or athlete websites.
Pass
(c) (original research)
No uncited facts. Spot check of a few sources indicates the sources support the text.
Pass
Fixed (a), I had been delaying, knowing that it takes a while until anyone starts a GAN review, but I then completely forgot to cleanup. -- Zanimum (talk) 00:51, 17 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Broad in its coverage:
Criteria
Notes
Result
(a) (major aspects)
Organisation makes this difficult to determine. Some sentences appear in sections that do not seem entirely relevant. How did Mortimer qualify for the London Games? The article does not make this clear.
Don't know
(b) (focused)
Why is this in the swimming section? "Mortimer listens to music on an MP3 player; she listens to any music, other than hardcore punk, particular upbeat songs. She uses SpiderTech tape and liquid tape." Another why is it here question: "On April 2011, Mortimer won an Ontario Sport Award from Sport Alliance Ontario for Female Athlete with a Disability of the Year. Her father was nominated for Male Coach of the Year, losing to Anthony McCleary, a track coach". Is this World level competitions? It doesn't appear to be. These random statements make the focus seem not there because the content has sections that have little that appear to do with the section name.
Undetermined
(a) I've merged two short paragraphs in that section to make one... does that highlight the qualification more? It is weird that she had two national-level tournaments after she qualified, but I suppose that's good for the athletes, to have significant advance notice. Qualification was in April, the others in July. -- Zanimum (talk) 01:42, 17 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
(b) Sorry, that MP3 sentence was lacking the fact that she listens pre-swim... I included it in that section as it was a swimming-related practice. Is it less distracting in personal life? I'm not attached to it. I'm more interested in the Spidertech bit, as it's a Canadian invention, and while many Olympic athletes seem to be using it, it does relate to her disability. -- Zanimum (talk) 00:51, 17 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
Notes
Result
Article reads as neutral enough without descending into fanboy/fangirl speak or containing hatchet job information.
Pass
Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
Notes
Result
No on going content edit wars. No rename discussions. No merge proposals or AfDs.
Pass
Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
Criteria
Notes
Result
(a) (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales)
The reviewer has no notes here.
Pass
(b) (appropriate use with suitable captions)
The caption for the swimming venue image needs to be changed to make it explicit why this image was included in this article.
Randomly, I still need to do a plagiarism check on this article. Will wait for the above issues to be addressed before doing that. --LauraHale (talk) 05:41, 12 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
^ Compliance with other aspects of the Manual of Style, or the Manual of Style mainpage or subpages of the guides listed, is not required for good articles.
^This requirement is significantly weaker than the "comprehensiveness" required of featured articles; it allows shorter articles, articles that do not cover every major fact or detail, and overviews of large topics.
^Vandalism reversions, proposals to split or merge content, good faith improvements to the page (such as copy editing), and changes based on reviewers' suggestions do not apply. Nominations for articles that are unstable because of unconstructive editing should be placed on hold.
^Other media, such as video and sound clips, are also covered by this criterion.
^The presence of images is not, in itself, a requirement. However, if images (or other media) with acceptable copyright status are appropriate and readily available, then some such images should be provided.
I've read the comments, looked at the text and all concerns have been addressed. Checked against criteria again to make sure I hadn't not looked at a category (and looked at last night despite not commenting but before going to bed). Looks good.--LauraHale (talk) 21:10, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Don't know
Pass
Undetermined