Talk:Jack Nicklaus/GA1

GA Reassessment

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
This article has been reviewed as part of

Good article criteria

. In reviewing the article, I have found there are a number of serious issues that need to be addressed.

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose): b (MoS):

The prose is patchy, maybe a 5/10.

The lead is quite short and does not really adequately summarise the article.

Every section from "Close of playing career" to the end is patchy and poorly written. These have to be organised and expanded to contain all relevant information on his retirement and personal life and they have to be written in organised paragraphs and properly sourced.

It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

There is at least one ^{[citation needed]} tag. Also see above about poorly written and incomplete sections.

It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):

See above about retirement

It follows the neutral point of view
policy.
a (fair representation): b (all significant views):
It is stable.
It contains images, where possible, to illustrate the topic.
a (tagged and captioned): b (lack of images does not in itself exclude GA): c (non-free images have
fair use rationales
):
Overall:
a Pass/Fail:

I will check back in no less than seven days. If progress is being made, the article will remain listed as a

WP:GAN again. Feel free to drop a message on my talk page if you have any questions, and many thanks for all the hard work that has gone into this article thus far. Regards--Jackyd101 (talk) 10:41, 18 December 2008 (UTC)[reply

]

I believe all your points have been satisfied, but tell me if i'm wrong. :) Grovermj 02:15, 24 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It looks good, as I was reading through though I noticed that in the "Career downturn (1968-1970)" section there is a mix of citation styles, with one sentance referenced by (My Story) in parenthesis while the others have inline citations.--Jackyd101 (talk) 19:32, 24 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've seen a few more of these and you need to select one style or the other and stick with it. Convert one or the other so they are all consistant.--Jackyd101 (talk) 19:33, 24 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ok all converted. Grovermj 01:57, 25 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the improvements, this now qualifies for GA. There are still problems with prose and I think that for such an important figure in his sport there is probably a lot more that could be said about him, but it is at least good enough to remain a GA. Thankyou.--Jackyd101 (talk) 03:16, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]