Jump to content

Talk:TNA World Beer Drinking Championship

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleTNA World Beer Drinking Championship 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.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
January 12, 2012Good article nomineeListed

GA Review

[edit]
This review is transcluded from Talk:TNA World Beer Drinking Championship/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: MathewTownsend (talk · contribs) 19:31, 12 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

GA review-see WP:WIAGA for criteria (and here for what they are not)

  1. Is it reasonably well written?
    A. Prose: clear and concise, correct spelling and grammar:
    • "and Young took the championship with him, having apparently won it" - took the championship, like walking out the door with it?
    • "The first round was a "never have I ever" round" - what is this?
    • Sadly, this was a time when TNA wrote some of the dumbest stuff. Its a skit. They are playing beer games. I tried to explain what was going on better.--WillC 22:39, 12 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • "The second round was contested with both participants having beer bottles taped to their hands and neither being allowed to go to the bathroom. - what's happening here. I don't get it.
    • "Young won after Storm wet himself, which was confirmed by the newly named Jackie Moore". - "wet" as in peeing? Who is Jackie Moore?
    • "after interference from Rhino" - what is "interference" here?
    • "Storm won the bout after Moore retrieved the championship for him without the referee seeing" - explain? What didn't the referee see?
    B. Complies with MoS for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
  2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
    A. Provides references to all sources:
    B. Provides in-line citations from reliable sources where necessary:
    C. No original research:
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. Main aspects are addressed:
    B. Remains focused:
  4. Does it follow the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. Is it stable?
    No edit wars, etc:
  6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
    A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
    B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:
  • Also, I made some edits which you should check for accuracy - that I didn't inadvertently introduce error.[1]
  • I will put this on hold so you can respond.

MathewTownsend (talk) 21:24, 12 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Reply
  • just one more qurestion: "The first round was a "never have I ever" round, in which the participants had to admit to experiences they had never been involved in. If the opponent had partaken in a similar action he was forced to drink a shot." Do you mean that if the westler had never had the experience, but his oponent has, then the oponent is forced to drink another shot? MathewTownsend (talk) 22:54, 12 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Reevaluation after fixes
1. Well written?: Pass Pass
2. Factually accurate?: Pass Pass
3. Broad in coverage?: Pass Pass
4. Neutral point of view?: Pass Pass
5. Article stability?: Pass Pass
6. Images?: Pass Pass

Congratulations! MathewTownsend (talk) 23:26, 12 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for passing and reviewing this article.--WillC 23:28, 12 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]


The article may be good but the subject is stupid. Radio Sharon (talk) 14:26, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Picture

[edit]

Can Anyone be able to find a fair use image of the belt (WorldSeriesOfPoker500 (talk) 14:44, 24 March 2012 (UTC))[reply]

Insignificant title overall, with it mostly being a comedy prop. A fair use image in this point would be pointless.--WillC 10:05, 25 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]