Talk:2011 Grand National

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Good article 2011 Grand National 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.
July 7, 2011 Good article nominee Listed

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:2011 Grand National/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Puffin Let's talk! 19:53, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

1. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct?  Done - No issues

2. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation?  Done - No issues

3. It provides references to all sources of information in the section(s) dedicated to the attribution of these sources according to the guide to layout?  Done - No issues

4. It provides in-line citations from reliable sources for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines?  Done - No issues

5. It contains no original research?  Done - No issues

6. It addresses the main aspects of the topic?  Done - Very good

7. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail?  Done - Not too much detail I suppose

8. It represents viewpoints fairly and without bias, giving due weight to each?  Done -

9. It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute? Not done - Looking at the history, there are a few disputes.

10. Illustrated, if possible, by images:  Done

(a) Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content?  Done - All images fine.

(b) Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions?  Done

Pass or fail?  Done Pass because of second opinion.

2nd Opinion[edit]

An IP inserting unsourced material is not an editing dispute. I have reverted them. Jezhotwells (talk) 20:29, 7 July 2011 (UTC)


I don't like to muck around with a GA, but we shouldn't really have flags in the infobox. See WP:MOSFLAG. Tigerboy1966  22:05, 26 July 2012 (UTC)