Talk:2009 Alabama Crimson Tide football team/GA1

GA Review

edit

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

Reviewer: Jezhotwells (talk) 15:10, 12 March 2011 (UTC)Reply

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

Disambiguations: none found.

Linkrot: two found and tagged.[1] Jezhotwells (talk) 15:18, 12 March 2011 (UTC)Reply

Checking against GA criteria

edit
GA review (see here for criteria)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose):   b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):  
    according various publications. various is a weasel word here, also missing preposition.  Done
    Statement reworded and "various" removed. Patriarca12 (talk) 17:58, 12 March 2011 (UTC)Reply
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references):   b (citations to reliable sources):   c (OR):  
    There are a large number of cites to http://www.al.com/blogs/ Blogs are not a [[WP:RS|reliable source.  Done
    Two dead links refs #166 & #199  Done
    Otherwise references check, assume good faith for off-line sources.
    All of the http://www.al.com/blogs/ have been removed as each one that was used was a secondary source citation. The two dead links have alos been fixed. Patriarca12 (talk) 17:58, 12 March 2011 (UTC)Reply
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects):   b (focused):  
    Thorough coverage of the subject
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:  
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:  
  6. 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):  
    Captioned and tagged.
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:  
    On Hold for seven days for issues above to be addressed. Jezhotwells (talk) 16:38, 12 March 2011 (UTC)Reply
    Ok, that does the trick. I am happy to list. Congratulations! Jezhotwells (talk) 18:51, 14 March 2011 (UTC)Reply
    Thanks for taking the time for the review! I believe I have made all of the requested changes, but please feel free to let me know if anything else needs to be done. Thanks again! Patriarca12 (talk) 17:58, 12 March 2011 (UTC)Reply