Talk:George Campbell (American football)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Good article George Campbell (American football) 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.
Article milestones
Date Process Result
January 4, 2014 Good article nominee Listed
Did You Know
WikiProject Biography / Sports and Games (Rated GA-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the sports and games work group (marked as Low-importance).
WikiProject American football (Rated GA-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject American football, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the American football on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:George Campbell (American football)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Seabuckthorn (talk · contribs) 02:03, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
Nominator: TonyTheTiger(T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD)

Hi! I'll be reviewing this article for GA status, and should have my full review up shortly. --Seabuckthorn  02:03, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

  1. Is it reasonably well written?
    A. Prose is "clear and concise", without copyvios, or spelling and grammar errors:
    B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
    See below for issues with lead, layout & lists. Yes check.svg Done
  1. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
    A. Has an appropriate reference section:
    B. Citation to reliable sources where necessary:
    C. No original research:
  2. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. Major aspects:
    B. Focused:
  3. Is it neutral?
    Fair representation without bias:
  4. Is it stable?
    No edit wars, etc:
  5. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
    A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
    B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
  6. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:
    On hold for the 1b issues. Yes check.svg Done Pass

WP:LEAD: Yes check.svg Done

WP:LAYOUT: Yes check.svg Done

  • Fix Headings and sections (MOS:BODY).
    • Use a different heading for section Early life. This section hardly has anything before 2011 so the early is not appropriate.
    • Very short or very long sections and subsections in an article look cluttered and inhibit the flow of the prose. I recommend breaking up text in the Early life section and organizing content into separate sections.
  • Fix section Personal (MOS:PARAGRAPHS). The number of single-sentence paragraphs should be minimized. Short paragraphs and single sentences generally do not warrant their own subheading. Either this section should be merged into the previous section, or else more information on the personal life should be added.
    • Now, it is at the beginning of the High school section. I believe it should be reverted back to the early life name with this change.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 06:51, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
      • It's your call. But really, I believe the article looks clear and good now. --Seabuckthorn  12:36, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

WP:EMBED: X mark.svg Not done

  • Embedded lists should be used only when appropriate; sometimes the information in a list is better presented as prose paragraphs. Tables are a complex form of list. (MOS:TABLES). I recommend removing the table as most of the information is already covered in the lead and infobox.
    • This table is a standard element of an article for a football or basketball bio. I probably have included them in 50 prior WP:GAs.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 06:52, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
      • OK. For the sake of closure, I'm marking it as 'not done'. --Seabuckthorn  12:36, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

I'm putting the article on hold. All the best! --Seabuckthorn  10:07, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

OK, everything looks good now. Passing the article to GA status. --Seabuckthorn  12:36, 4 January 2014 (UTC)