Talk:Destination X (2008)
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Destination X (2008) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Destination X (2008) has been listed as one of the Sports and recreation 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. | ||||||||||
|
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors |
Merge
- I'm about to write the report for this article. It doesn't need to be merged for that reason alone. I'm going to star working on TNA ppvs. Someone needs to undertake the duty to make TNA ppvs like WWE's. That is why this ppv was made.--WillC 01:51, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
GA Review
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
- This review is transcluded from Talk:Destination X (2008)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: MathewTownsend (talk · contribs) 21:24, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
I will begin this review shortly.
MathewTownsend (talk) 21:24, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
- Review
This is a very complicated article with a great deal of information. Everything checks out for what I can tell. Nicely formatted! I made a few copy edits[1] which you are free to change.
There were a few places where I had questions about the prose:
- Lede
- This event marked the second time the Elevation X match was used by TNA. - what does "used by TNA" mean?
- TNA created the match and this was the second time it was used. A scaffold match is somewhat rare in wrestling but has been done several times. They gave it the Elevation X name.--WillC 00:12, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
- This event marked the second time the Elevation X match was used by TNA. - what does "used by TNA" mean?
- Storylines
- "with the two scheduled to face for the title at TNA's next PPV event Lockdown on April 13, 2008." - is "scheduled to face for the title" correct?
- Yeah, but changed it to "fight for the title."--WillC 00:12, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
- "Also connected was Cage's feud with Styles and Tomko" - Also part of the storyline?
- Added "in the storyline" to clarify the sentence.--WillC 00:12, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
- "participants in the match fought in matches" - repetitious
- Worked on it to clarify.--WillC 00:12, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
- "Rhino returned from injury attacking Storm during his encounter with Eric Young" - not clear what this means.
- Worked on it to clarify.--WillC 00:12, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
- "fracturing her jaw in storyline" - in the storyline?
- "which gave Kim an injury in storyline" - in the storyline?
- "with the two scheduled to face for the title at TNA's next PPV event Lockdown on April 13, 2008." - is "scheduled to face for the title" correct?
- Aftermath
- "They got their championship match on the April 17 episode of Impact!" - doesn't sound right with "got".
I will put the review on hold.
MathewTownsend (talk) 22:43, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
- Is it reasonably well written?
- Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
- A. References to sources:
- All is in order.
- B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
- Well referenced and accurately reflects the sources
- C. No original research:
- There is no OR
- A. References to sources:
- Is it broad in its coverage?
- A. Major aspects:
- Covers all aspects
- B. Focused:
- Remains focused on the article subject
- A. Major aspects:
- Does it follow the neutral point of view policy.
- Fair representation without bias:
- Neutrally worded
- Fair representation without bias:
- Is it stable?
- No edit wars, etc:
- Very stable
- No edit wars, etc:
- Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
- A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
- Public domain images; one fair-use that has the proper rationale
- B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
- Nicely illustrated with informative captions properly formatted.
- A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
- Overall:
- Pass or Fail:
- Pass or Fail:
Congratulations! MathewTownsend (talk) 00:47, 22 December 2011 (UTC) Thank you for the review and passing the article.--WillC 02:13, 22 December 2011 (UTC)