Talk:New Year's Revolution (2007)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
Good articleNew Year's Revolution (2007) 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
DateProcessResult
December 5, 2007Peer reviewReviewed
January 21, 2008Featured article candidateNot promoted
March 29, 2008Good article nomineeListed
Current status: Good article
WikiProject iconMissouri Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is part of WikiProject Missouri, a WikiProject related to the U.S. state of Missouri. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.MissouriWikipedia:WikiProject MissouriTemplate:WikiProject MissouriMissouri articles
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This photo doesnt belong

the picture of K-Fed, Big Show, and Booker has nothing to do with this event. It works for Cyber Sunday, but no one in that picture was at the event. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Juniorlizard (talk • contribs) 00:57, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:WWEnyr07.jpg

fair use
.

Please go to

Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline
is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

talk) 05:14, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply
]

GA review

WP:WIAGA
for criteria

This article contains information to the appropriate depth and perhaps too much. The structure of the article requires some development.

  1. Is it well written?
    A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
    B. It complies with the
    list incorporation
    :
  2. Is it
    source spot-check
    ?
    A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with
    the layout style guideline
    :
    Add a citation for the tagline and attendance number.
    B. Reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose):
    C. It contains no original research:
    D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:
    The major aspects are not clearly stated and identified in the first Background paragraph. Use a descriptive lead sentence.
    B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
    The Background paragraphs are long and confusing. Requires rewriting or reorganizing. Some of the information is not entirely relevant and should be removed. Paragraphs should be split.
  4. Is it
    neutral
    ?
    It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
  5. Is it stable?
    It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing
    edit war
    or content dispute:
  6. Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
    A. Images are
    copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content
    :
    B. Images are
    suitable captions
    :
    The first picture is not directly relevant to the Cena/Umaga feud. Flair picture's caption needs to state its relevance to the event.
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:
    Please address the above concerns and notify me for a reevaluation. --
    13 of Diamonds (talk) 04:43, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply
    ]


Reevaluation
  • References by nicknames ("Samoan Bulldozer") and descriptions ("Caribbean Superstar") is unnecessary and confusing.
     Done. –Cheers, LAX 15:56, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • People should be not be referred to by given name only. (Mickie, Shawn, Jeff, etc.)
     Done. –Cheers, LAX 16:04, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "the FU" should be changed to "an FU".
     Done. –Cheers, LAX 15:56, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Grammar: "were both confronted by security" should be "both were".
     Done ♥Nici♥Vampire♥Heart♥ 15:21, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Subsequent uses of a name (person or team) in a paragraph should be consistent in being surname only. Same should be done for established contractions (DX).

--

13 of Diamonds (talk) 11:20, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply
]

  • I've looked over this, and I can't really see any reasons why the GA (2nd opinion requested, it says) shouldn't be passed, so I have done so. Tell me if I've screwed up!
    H2O) 00:46, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply
    ]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on

nobots
|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{

Sourcecheck
}}).

This message was posted before February 2018.

regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check
}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

Cheers.—

Talk to my owner:Online 17:18, 1 March 2016 (UTC)[reply
]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on New Year's Revolution (2007). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018.

regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check
}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:16, 12 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:New_Year%27s_Revolution_(2007)&oldid=1207184738"