Talk:2016 Volta a Catalunya/GA1

Latest comment: 8 years ago by Jaguar in topic GA Review

GA Review

edit
GA toolbox
Reviewing

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

Reviewer: Jaguar (talk · contribs) 21:23, 21 April 2016 (UTC)Reply


I will be reviewing this as part of a GAN sweep. I'll leave some comments soon. JAGUAR  21:23, 21 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

Disambiguations: No links found.

Linkrot: No linkrot found in this article.

Checking against the GA criteria

edit
GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose, no copyvios, spelling and grammar):   b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):  
    The lead summarises the article well, so no issues here. However, I would recommend moving the citations into the body per WP:LEADCITE
    "This was a particular concern" - just lose 'concern' or rephrase it to This was particularly a concern
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (reference section):   b (citations to reliable sources):   c (OR):  
    No original research found.
  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 and other media, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales):   b (appropriate use with suitable captions):  
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:  

This is well written, comprehensive and well sourced. It meets the criteria, so passing   JAGUAR  17:15, 22 April 2016 (UTC)Reply