Talk:Angela James/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Canada Hky (talk · contribs) 02:21, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

---

Only minor things here. I went through and made a few minor, clean-up type edits before starting this review. If you could review them, and make sure I haven't changed the meaning of anything substantial, that would be great.

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

   Consider making a note of when her international career ended in the lead? Also, when (year) did she step in as a goalie. If this wasn't at the OWHA level, maybe give it a mention.

   Added the end of her international career to lead. And I never could find a source for the specific date of that game as a goalie. Merely the mention that she did play once in that Hockey Canada piece. Resolute 18:53, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

1. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

   No problems

2. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   This kind of overlaps a bit with #4, but the sentence about 'not being secretive nor politicizing', could maybe just be left out. Drawing attention to how someone doesn't draw attention to something doesn't quite fit.

   Removed, and I agree that it was awkward. I was trying to convey the viewpoint she expressed as explained in her biography, but kind of botched it. There might be a need for a bit more there, as openly gay athletes are a rarity, but I'm not sure how to word it. Resolute 18:53, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

3. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

   See above, but otherwise no problems.

4. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

5. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

   Not applicable.

6. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   Minor issues to fix up or reject, I'll be happy to promote this once they are cleaned up.

   Addressed the two specific comments that I could. The copyediting you did also looks fine. Thanks for the review! Cheers! Resolute 18:53, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

The minor issues I had raised were addressed, I'll promote this to GA. Canada Hky (talk) 23:54, 6 January 2013 (UTC)