Talk:Jack Tatum: Difference between revisions
m {{NFLproject|class=GA}} |
No edit summary |
||
Line 23: | Line 23: | ||
==GA?== |
==GA?== |
||
Did this article actually pass the GA review? or did someone just add the <nowiki>{{GA}}</nowiki> tag? Isn't the reviewer supposed to add another section which confirms GA status? --[[User:ShadowJester07|ShadowJester07]] 23:44, 9 December 2006 (UTC) |
Did this article actually pass the GA review? or did someone just add the <nowiki>{{GA}}</nowiki> tag? Isn't the reviewer supposed to add another section which confirms GA status? --[[User:ShadowJester07|ShadowJester07]] 23:44, 9 December 2006 (UTC) |
||
==Bias== |
|||
This article is biased. Only a Raiders fan would refer to the Immaculate Reception as "notorious". |
Revision as of 01:02, 9 April 2007
Biography: Sports and Games GA‑class | ||||||||||
|
National Football League GA‑class | ||||||||||
|
Template:FACfailed is deprecated, and is preserved only for historical reasons. Please see Template:Article history instead. |
This article (or a previous version) is a former featured article candidate. Please view its sub-page to see why the nomination did not succeed. For older candidates, please check the Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Archived nominations. |
Jack Tatum has been listed as one of the good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. Review: No date specified. To provide a date use: {{GA|insert date in any format here}}. |
Template:Maintained Template:0.5 held
Failed GA
The promo pic tag on the main picture is inappropriate - the photo is a commercial product, not a promotional picture. The second picture seems a little dodgy in its fair use claim - how is this any different from recycling the content taken straight from a new site to illustrate articles, for instance? The fact that no specific fair use template is available ought to be ringing alarm bells. However, the article is well-referenced and well-structured, which is a very good start. Please address the comments here, in peer review, and in FAC (some very helpful ones there!), and then renominate it! TheGrappler 03:50, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
- Now that the pics are removed, should their captions go too? TheGrappler 18:19, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
Failed GA (2nd)
I've failed the article again, mostly because it fails two criteria for GA:
- It has compelling prose, and is readily comprehensible to a non-specialist reader: the text needs a general copyedit, and it is too dependent on the reader knowing details from outside, particularily in the College section. This was brought up on the FAC, and has not been addressed.
- It is broad in its coverage: it is missing significant amount of information about the controversy following the Darryl Stingley incident, to the point where it almost seems whitewashed.
Overall, the article is almost good, but is still missing a little bit. Titoxd(?!? - help us) 01:34, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
I fixed the college section some, and I added as much infomation about the Stingley controversy in the article. I don't get the almost seems whitewashed Part. I think it's good now. Thanks Jaranda wat's sup 17:41, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
GA?
Did this article actually pass the GA review? or did someone just add the {{GA}} tag? Isn't the reviewer supposed to add another section which confirms GA status? --ShadowJester07 23:44, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
Bias
This article is biased. Only a Raiders fan would refer to the Immaculate Reception as "notorious".
- GA-Class biography articles
- GA-Class biography (sports and games) articles
- High-importance biography (sports and games) articles
- Sports and games work group articles
- WikiProject Biography articles
- GA-Class National Football League articles
- Unknown-importance National Football League articles
- WikiProject National Football League articles
- Wikipedia featured article candidates (contested)
- Wikipedia good articles
- Undated GA templates
- Good articles without topic parameter