Talk:Craig McAllister

	Craig McAllister 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 August 23, 2011 Good article nominee Listed

This article was nominated for deletion on 30 January 2012. The result of the discussion was nomination withdrawn.

This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Biography: Sports and Games 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.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles This article is supported by the sports and games work group (assessed as Low-importance). Football: England / Scotland / Wales Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Football, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Association 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.FootballWikipedia:WikiProject FootballTemplate:WikiProject Footballfootball articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by the English football task force (assessed as Low-importance). This article is supported by the Scottish football task force (assessed as Low-importance). This article is supported by the Welsh football task force (assessed as Low-importance). inactive .HertfordshireWikipedia:WikiProject HertfordshireTemplate:WikiProject HertfordshireHertfordshire articles

	Guild of Copy Editors
This article was copy edited by GreenPine, a member of the Guild of Copy Editors, on 6 June 2011.Guild of Copy EditorsWikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsTemplate:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsGuild of Copy Editors articles

This review is

transcluded from Talk:Craig McAllister/GA1

. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 20:09, 22 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'll review this article shortly. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 20:09, 22 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Here are the issues I found:

• There's some questionable paraphrasing in a spot. It's nothing blatant or quick-fail worthy, just a bit on the close side:
  • Article = "he attracted interest from a number of Conference sides and he eventually signed for Grays Athletic."; Source = "earned interest from a number of Blue Square Premier sides. McAllister eventually signed for Grays Athletic," I'd change "a number of" to several, and maybe take out eventually and put in a date. That should solve any problems there. Rest of the sources I looked at check out clean.
• Richard Logan links to a disambig page. Have it link to the correct footballer.
• Ref #35 ("Bees make late double swoop".) is a deadlink.
• Adding in a couple McAllisters to the lead and the second body paragraph may be helpful to break monotony.
• "where he made 6 appearances" six
• "He went on to score 7 goals in his fist season" make sure to spell out single-digit numbers when they're standalone like this. double check the article for them.
• "He finished 2002–03 with thirty-five goals to his name, from forty-seven games." reword slightly, maybe simply "...with 35 goals in 47 games." Ironically, you're spelling out the bigger numbers when you can just write them normally. If you have to hyphenate a number, just spell it out, basically. Again, go through the article and fix, I'm not listing each example. (Sentences like these "After scoring 66 times in 112 games for Basingstoke Town," are what I want to see)
• The infobox shows 92 apps and 55 goals for Basingstoke Town, but the chart below has 96 and 53. Which is right?

I'll put the article on hold and pass when the issues are fixed. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 16:34, 23 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Everything checks out now, so I'll pass the article as a GA. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 19:49, 23 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]