Talk:James Meredith (soccer)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:James Meredith (footballer)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

GA review (see here for criteria)

---

The article needs to be expanded, at the moment it is a short article that doesn't draw the reader in. Sentences sound more like a list than a paragraph. I think it would be almost pushing to say this is a C-class article, it needs to be more 'readable'. Please peer review it before next assessment! JRA_WestyQld2 ^Talk 00:35, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

   Information doesn't flow. There are sections with one or two sentences. When career is expanded, it will need to have sub-sections. Much of the article sounds repetitive. Meredith went to Derby. He scored a goal. He played a game. He then got loaned. He then got traded.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

   I don't know why his personal life has an unreliable reference tag, but you may want to ask this user why he added the tag. Personally I think it's fine and unless he has a reasonable explanation, the tag should be removed.

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   Biggest drawback. Needs expanding. A lot of it.

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

   Although there has been a few edit undo's in it's short lifespan for such a small article.

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

   If the article is expanded, perhaps more photos would be nice?

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   I have failed the article due to it being much like the Alex Lawless nomination. It needs significant expansion before being considered for good article status.

Content to cover

• Football in Australia. Who was he playing for in Melbourne? A quick google search hinted that he played in the Oceania Jnr Championships and therefore would be some type of junior representative for Australia
• Early career Derby - Sligo is pretty light
• Style of play should either be merged with the rest of the article or be at least a paragraph long.
• The same with personal life. However, I believe more can be included. What about his family? Does he have another job? Does he have a weird obsession with toenails? Research.
• References. Use a wider range. It will give you better information from several points of view.

I hope this helps JRA_WestyQld2 ^Talk 00:35, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

GA Nomination

Due to several article problems, namely the size of the article. I have failed it's good article nomination. Please see the nomination. JRA_WestyQld2 ^Talk 00:37, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:James Meredith (footballer)/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 21:31, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Well-written:

(a) the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct; and

(b) it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.

Verifiable with no original research:

(a) it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline;

(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); and

(c) it contains no original research.

Broad in its coverage:

(a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic; and

(b) it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).

Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.

Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.

Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:

(a) media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content; and

(b) media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.