Talk:1930 FIFA World Cup/GA1
Appearance
GA Reassessment
[edit]Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
I am reassessing this articles GA status as part of the WP:WikiProject Good articles/Project quality task force/Sweeps process. Jezhotwells (talk) 18:57, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
Quick fail criteria assessment
- The article completely lacks reliable sources – see Wikipedia:Verifiability.
- The topic is treated in an obviously non-neutral way – see Wikipedia:Neutral point of view.
- There are cleanup banners that are obviously still valid, including cleanup, wikify, NPOV, unreferenced or large numbers of fact, clarifyme, or similar tags.
- The article is or has been the subject of ongoing or recent, unresolved edit wars.
- The article specifically concerns a rapidly unfolding current event with a definite endpoint.
No problems found when checking against quick fail criteria. Proceeding to substantive review. Jezhotwells (talk) 19:01, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
Checking against GA criteria
[edit]- It is reasonably well written.
- a (prose):
- This article is reasonably well written. Jezhotwells (talk) 19:04, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
- b (MoS):
- The article complies sufficiently with the MoS. Jezhotwells (talk) 19:04, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
- a (prose):
- It is factually accurate and verifiable.
- a (references):
There are a number of dead links, shown at {http://toolserver.org/~dispenser/cgi-bin/webchecklinks.py?page=1930_FIFA_World_Cup}; others such as premium Tv and sky ports have moved and redirect to the front page of the web site. I have reformatted several cites which were bare html links. There are others which need converting using citation templates. Jezhotwells (talk) 20:04, 14 June 2009 (UTC)Done Jezhotwells (talk) 17:23, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
- b (citations to reliable sources):
- {
http://www.v-brazil.com/} is not a reliable source. Jezhotwells (talk) 20:04, 14 June 2009 (UTC)Done Jezhotwells (talk) 17:23, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
- {
- c (OR):
- No evidence of OR
- a (references):
- It is broad in its scope.
- a (major aspects):
- The article is broad in scope Jezhotwells (talk) 20:04, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
- b (focused):
- and focussed. Jezhotwells (talk) 20:04, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
- a (major aspects):
- It follows the neutral point of view policy.
- Fair representation without bias:
- Fair representation without bias:
- It is stable.
- No edit wars etc.:
- The article is stable Jezhotwells (talk) 20:06, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
- No edit wars etc.:
- It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
- a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):
- tagged and licensed Jezhotwells (talk) 20:09, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
- b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
- Captions OK Jezhotwells (talk) 20:09, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
- a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):
- Overall:
- Pass/Fail:
- I am placing the article on hold for seven days whilst the references are fixed, otherwise OK. Jezhotwells (talk) 20:09, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
- OK looks to be all fixed now, GA status confirmed. Jezhotwells (talk) 17:23, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
- Pass/Fail: