Talk:2022 College Football Playoff National Championship/GA1
Latest comment: 2 years ago by NSNW in topic GA Review
GA Review
editGA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: NSNW (talk · contribs) 13:44, 18 March 2022 (UTC)
Hello! I will be reviewing this nomination soon, will be finished in a few days. NSNW (talk) 13:44, 18 March 2022 (UTC)
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
- Is it well written?
- A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
- B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
- A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
- Is it verifiable with no original research?
- A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:
- B. All in-line citations are from reliable sources, including those for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines:
- C. It contains no original research:
- D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:
- A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:
- Is it broad in its coverage?
- A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:
- B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
- A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:
- Is it neutral?
- It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
- It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
- Is it stable?
- It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
- It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
- Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
- A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:
- B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
- A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:
- Overall:
- Pass or Fail:
- Pass or Fail:
References:
edit[1] and [3] are twitter posts, which are generally unreliable per WP:Reliable sources, there should be better sources out there.- No. 1 replaced; No. 3 was added by another user and I decided to keep it per WP:SELFSOURCE; if you don't think that applies I'll remove it. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 19:57, 18 March 2022 (UTC)
* [4], [5], and [6] could be better sources, (I'm unsure if they are reliable or not).
(Reference 13), Is Marca a reliable source? Please explain. Same thing with (Reference 24) with NJ.com.(Reference 26), Why is a source from Paris better than a local american source?- Paris, Tennessee, not Paris, France. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 19:57, 18 March 2022 (UTC)
- My mistake.
- Paris, Tennessee, not Paris, France. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 19:57, 18 March 2022 (UTC)
(Reference 34), (Reference 43), and (Reference 45), Why is SB Nation a reliable source?(Reference 57), "Awful Announcing" doesn't sound very reliable.(Reference 59), How is Sports Video Group a reliable source?(Reference 61), Same as Ref 59
Broadness:
edit- There is barely any information in the "Background" and "College football playoff" sections. Surely there is more information out there about these particular topics. I know GA doesn't require comprehensiveness but I feel like more info should be included in those areas before I pass requirement three.
- Is there anything in specific you'd recommend putting here? Happy to expand it but I want to make sure we're on the same page. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 19:58, 18 March 2022 (UTC)
- A bit more of an explanation on how Lucas Oil Stadium was chosen as the place of the game, (on a side note I am a native Indianan), and maybe some of the preparation for the game in the stadium (the whole section just seems dull). Also on the College football playoff section it would be nice to see some more explanation of the previous playoff games, I see you put some description in the (Alabama) and (Georgia) sub sections, but try to work some of that in there. NSNW (talk) 21:19, 18 March 2022 (UTC)
- I've been having some computer issues recently so if you could afford me a few more days than normal to make these improvements, I'd appreciate it. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 01:50, 27 March 2022 (UTC)
- Sure thing, I'll add some more comments while I'm at it. NSNW (talk) 12:01, 27 March 2022 (UTC)
- I added some more background on Lucas Oil in that section and I'll expand the CFP subsection below it later today. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 15:56, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
- Well done. NSNW (talk) 16:02, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
- I've given the College Football Playoff section some more background and detail; happy to add more if there's something specific you think would be good to have there. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 06:51, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
- @NSNW Hi there - just wanted to give you a quick ping in case you didn't see this last message. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 19:35, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
- Well done. NSNW (talk) 16:02, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
- I added some more background on Lucas Oil in that section and I'll expand the CFP subsection below it later today. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 15:56, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
- Sure thing, I'll add some more comments while I'm at it. NSNW (talk) 12:01, 27 March 2022 (UTC)
- I've been having some computer issues recently so if you could afford me a few more days than normal to make these improvements, I'd appreciate it. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 01:50, 27 March 2022 (UTC)