Talk:Electric Company (football)/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 17:47, 9 August 2010 (UTC) GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose quality:

   Don't forget to capitalize Electric Company every time you use it.

   O.K. fixed.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 17:13, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

   Still needs a light copy-edit. Forex Tackle doesn't need to be capitalized.

   Some awkward tags that need to be worked on.

   I have removed two tags that I am fairly certain are resolved. I have also tweaked the other two, but they await your removal.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 20:03, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

   Most of these still remain to be addressed.

   B. MoS compliance:

   Capitalization issues in refs.

   Fixed.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 17:17, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. References to sources:

   B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

   C. No original research:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   What position did Jarvis play? Interesting that there were only three Pro Bowlers on the unit.

   Center.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 17:19, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

   B. Focused:

4. Is it neutral?

   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: