Talk:Darrell Clarke/GA1
Latest comment: 2 years ago by BigDom in topic GA Review
GA Review
edit| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: BigDom (talk · contribs) 11:12, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
Hi, I'll review this. BigDom (talk) 11:12, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
- It is reasonably well written.
- a (prose, spelling, and grammar):
b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
(1a) Prose is fine as I suspected it would be when I saw who the author was. A couple of very minor points, I think 'Pool should just be written out as Hartlepool, and club nicknames have sometimes been given single quotes, other times double (I don't mind which is used). Also I think "5–0 demolition" is a little too colloquial and "organization" should use British spelling as in the rest of the article.
(1b) In the second paragraph of the Hartlepool United section, I would consider adding non-breaking spaces before the en-dashes where they are used as punctuation (see WP:MOSDASH) or replacing them with an easier-to-read punctuation.
All done now, I was bold and fixed the last couple of remaining issues myself.
- a (prose, spelling, and grammar):
- It is factually accurate and verifiable.
- a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):
(2a) Italicising of publisher names is inconsistently applied. Ref 91 (Training Ground Guru) is showing a template error.Excellent job finding new sources, thanks.
(2b) Some sentences don't have citations at the end; the claims about Salisbury's severe financial problems, being popular at Mansfield because he was home-grown, attracting interest from different clubs before joining Hartlepool, and being named captain at Salisbury all definitely need one. What makes the following reliable sources: port-vale.buzzsprout.com, sportnetwork.net, nonleaguebets.co.uk (this appears to be dead anyway), trainingground.guru, inbedwithmaradona.com? There are also a couple of references tagged as permanently dead, can these be replaced?
(2d) Copyvio looks fine, I ran it through the tool and the only things that showed up were the direct quotes, which are suitably referenced.
- a (reference section):
- It is broad in its coverage.
- a (major aspects): b (focused):
Maybe a touch recent-heavy but overall good. His management section is considerably more detailed than the 18 years of his playing career, which is OK as I think he is more notable as a manager, but sometimes the detail strays into the excessive. For example, I don't think complete lists of recruited players for the 21–22 transfer windows are necessary when this info isn't given for previous seasons - maybe just pick one or two of the key signings. The one-sentence style of play section can probably also be worked into his playing career.
Looks much better now.
- a (major aspects):
- It follows the neutral point of view policy.
- Fair representation without bias:
- Fair representation without bias:
- It is stable.
- No edit wars, etc.:
- No edit wars, etc.:
- It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
- a (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
- Images seem to have correct licensing and both are captioned. The second photo is quite blurry but I think just about OK for GA, don't think it would make it past an FA reviewer though if you wanted to take the article further in future.
- a (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales):
- Overall:
- Brilliant, thank you. I believe I have address all of those concerns.--EchetusXe 19:56, 11 May 2022 (UTC)