Talk:The Boat Race 1909/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Caponer (talk · contribs) 10:36, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

The Rambling Man, I will be completing a thorough and comprehensive review of this article within the next 48 hours. Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns in the meantime. Thanks! -- Caponer (talk) 10:36, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

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

---

The Rambling Man, I have completed my review of the article, and while it looks like it meets the majority of criteria for passage to Good Article status, I do have some comments and questions that need to be addressed first. This is certainly another fantastic addition to the Boat Race series of articles! -- Caponer (talk) 10:52, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose, no copyvios, spelling and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

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

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. 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):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

Lede

• Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lead section, the lede should summarize the content from all three sections of the article. Therefore, I would add in some additional content to represent the "Crews" section, perhaps mentioning that the Oxford crew weighed an average of 12 st 8.25 lb (79.8 kg), 3.25 pounds (1.5 kg) per rower more than their opponents. I would either mention the weight, or you could include the fact that three of the Oxford crew were gold medallists in the men's coxless four at the 1908 Summer Olympics.

  Have added similar. The Rambling Man (talk) 11:06, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

• The lede is written well, its content is verifiable and internally cited within the prose below, and I have no further comments or suggestions.

  Thanks. The Rambling Man (talk) 11:06, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

Background

• Per Wikipedia:Inline citation, I would suggest consolidating internal citations at the end of sentences. This only occurs twice in this section within the first paragraph.

  I usually put the citations next to any quotations I've used. The Rambling Man (talk) 11:06, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

• Muttlebury's caricature is free for use here, and works well in this section.

  Cool. The Rambling Man (talk) 11:06, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

• This section is written well, its content is verifiable and internally cited within the prose, and I have no further comments or suggestions.

  Thanks. The Rambling Man (talk) 11:06, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

Crews

• It might be worth mentioning in this section that the majority (six) of the Oxford crew members were from Magdalen, and the majority (five) of the Cambridge crew members were from Trinity Hall.

  Added. The Rambling Man (talk) 11:06, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

• This section is written well, its content is verifiable and internally cited within the prose, and I have no further comments or suggestions. The table is also sourced, and beautifully formatted. The caricatures are free for use here, and fit snugly between the table and the right margin.

  Cool. The Rambling Man (talk) 11:06, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

Race

• The map is a free image and works well here.

  Thanks. The Rambling Man (talk) 11:06, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

• This section is written well, its content is verifiable and internally cited within the prose, and I have no comments or suggestions.

  Thanks. The Rambling Man (talk) 11:06, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for another review Caponer, let me know if you'd like to chat over any of the responses I've given above. The Rambling Man (talk) 11:06, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

You're quite welcome The Rambling Man; as always, I've enjoyed this review. The citation comment was merely a suggestion, and is therefore, not a deal breaker. Upon re-review, I've found that you have incorporated the majority of my suggestions, and I find that this article easily meets the criteria for passage to Good Article status. Thanks for all your hard work! -- Caponer (talk) 11:22, 26 January 2015 (UTC)