Talk:LW12/GA1

Latest comment: 11 years ago by North8000 in topic GA Review

GA Review

edit

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

Reviewer: North8000 (talk · contribs) 15:17, 22 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

I am starting a review of this article. North8000 (talk) 15:17, 22 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

Review discussion

edit

There is one area (IMHO important, considering the nature of the topic) which is either not covered or not clearly covered. I'm assuming that this is a particular standard the contents of which is authored and controlled by some organization. And I assume that it is implemented by bodies which run for competitions (by "implement" I mean make the decisions regarding which participant is in which class). This article really does not say or make clear who authors/controls it and who implements it. In some cases it appears that the details of the standard change with the event? Could you clarify this in the article? (and if there is more than one version of the standard, which body authors/controls the contents of each of those. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 16:16, 24 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

This was the main thing that I noted. The article looks pretty good. North8000 (talk) 16:06, 4 March 2013 (UTC)Reply
In the definition section it says that The International Paralympic Committee (IPC) explicitly defined this classification and A national federation such as Alpine Canada handles classification for domestic competitions. Hawkeye7 (talk) 18:43, 4 March 2013 (UTC)Reply
The item that I noted is on all 5 articles. I figure we can start with LW3 as an example location to sort it out. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 13:35, 5 March 2013 (UTC)Reply
I plan to make the edits to resolve this item. North8000 (talk) 14:16, 14 March 2013 (UTC)Reply
Done. North8000 (talk) 13:42, 22 March 2013 (UTC)Reply

In the future you may wish to consider an expansion of the title. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 13:51, 22 March 2013 (UTC)Reply

GA criteria final checklist

edit

Well-written

  • Meets this criteria

Factually accurate and verifiable

Broad in its coverage

Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without bias, giving due weight to each

Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute

Illustrated, if possible, by images

Update: 2 free videos have been added. North8000 (talk) 13:40, 22 March 2013 (UTC)Reply

This article has passed as a Wikipedia Good Article

edit

This article has passed as a Wikipedia Good Article. Congratulations! Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 13:48, 22 March 2013 (UTC) ReviewerReply