Talk:Hayward, California/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: TeacherA (talk · contribs) 03:17, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail: PASS IS ON HOLD PENDING A CO-REVIEWER

I would encourage critical re-evaluation of the photos. Evaluate every single one. For example, does the Holiday Bowl photo add anything? Maybe not? Check to see that the old logo is not copyrighted. Taking a photo of it doesn't invalidate copyright protection. I suspect that it is not copyrighted, but check.

The lede is only one paragraph. Also re-evaluate that. See if you can make at least two paragraphs but do it for clarity and purpose, not just put a paragraph break in there.

The history is lopsided. You mean there is little history for the past 50 years?

Also re-evaluate the people listed. Why list such and such.

TeacherA (talk) 03:17, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

This was removed by Wizardman. This is improper. If he did not think it was GA material, there is a nomination process. However, to work with others, I now am co-reviewing this article.

Please co-review it with me. The co-reviewer will have final say on the decision. My comments are advisory but have to be considered in good faith.

TeacherA (talk) 01:57, 6 June 2012 (UTC)