Talk:Spike Albrecht

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
2013 NCAA Men's Division I Basketball Tournament championship game first half performance by Spike Albrecht was featured in The New York Times
2013 Year in review?

GA Review

This review is
transcluded from Talk:Spike Albrecht
. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: FairyTailRocks (talk · contribs) 23:14, 8 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Quick-fail assessment
  1. The article completely lacks reliable sources – see Wikipedia:Verifiability. -
  2. The topic is treated in an obviously non-neutral way – see Wikipedia:Neutral point of view. -
  3. There are cleanup banners that are obviously still valid, including {{
    clarifyme
    }}, or similar tags. -
  4. The article is or has been the subject of ongoing or recent, unresolved edit wars. -
  5. The article specifically concerns a rapidly unfolding current event with a definite endpoint. -
Rate
Attribute
Review Comment
1. Well-written:
1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct. Noted some issues below
1b. it complies with the
list incorporation
.
Noted some issues below
2. Verifiable with no original research:
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with
the layout style guideline
.
Good here.
2b. 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).
2c. it contains no original research.
3. Broad in its coverage:
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic. I believe so
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style). Stayed on focused.
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each. Noted some issues below
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. No sign of edit warring.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as
audio
:
6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content. All of the images are licensed under Creative Commons.
6b. media are
relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions
.
Good here.
7. Overall assessment. Not yet for now, fix some issues I have said and ping me when it's all done. Thanks! FairyTailRocks (talk) 07:21, 15 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I may start this week, and just give me a few days because I have an exam on Monday. Thanks! FairyTailRocks (talk) 06:54, 9 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Lead
Early life
College career
Infobox
  • Upon re-reading the article per my previous suggestions, it looks good, however, I will do one final check against the GA criteria.
here
for what they are not)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose, no copyvios, spelling and grammar): b (
    lists
    )
    :
    Improved here
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (
    reliable sources): c (OR
    ):
    I think we are OK here.
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (
    focused
    )
    :
  4. It follows the
    neutral point of view
    policy
    .
    Fair representation without bias:
    Improved here.
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
    Good.
  6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free content have
    suitable captions
    )
    :
    Passed
  7. Overall: Congrats! You have promoted the article for GA!
    Pass/Fail: