Talk:Andrea Pirlo/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Jaguar (talk · contribs) 21:53, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

I shall be reviewing this against the GA criteria as part of a GAN sweep. I'll leave some comments soon. JAGUAR  21:53, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguations: No links found.

Linkrot: No linkrot found in this article.

Checking against the GA criteria

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):

   Usually citations are discouraged from the lead unless it's citing controversial information, per WP:LEADCITE. But given the complexity of this article, it should be fine. I wouldn't let it interfere with this GAN

   "whilst they were eliminated in the round of 32 of the UEFA Cup, and the round of 16 of the Coppa Italia." - needs a citation

   "Milan finished the season with a 3rd place in Serie A, and a quarter-final finish in the Coppa Italia under new manager Leonardo." - this sentence needs a citation too

   "Juventus were, however, eliminated by Bayern Munich in the quarter finals of the UEFA Champions League, and in the semi finals of the Coppa Italia by Lazio; both of these teams were the winners of these respective competitions." - this too, needs a citation since it's at the end of a paragraph

   I've merged a paragraph in the personal life section, if that's OK

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:

Looks very good overall. I couldn't find anything worthy enough to put this on hold, so I'll pass this. It's very comprehensive and well written throughout. It would be good if the missing citations could be addressed. JAGUAR  22:10, 19 April 2016 (UTC)