Talk:The Boat Race 2009/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Matty.007 (talk · contribs) 10:33, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

I'll take this on as a relatively recent Boat Race. I doubt there is much to do (comparing with other GAs such as the 2014 edition), merely a few minor tweaks, forthcoming. Thanks, Matty.007 10:33, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

• In 'Background', mention The Championship Course?
  • Done. The Rambling Man (talk) 11:15, 14 June 2014 (UTC)
• No DAB, refs and EL all link fine
  • Cool. The Rambling Man (talk) 11:15, 14 June 2014 (UTC)
• The Daily Telegraph is in italics for the ref, but CBC isn't. Should it be?
  • Telegraph is a work while CBC is a publisher. The Rambling Man (talk) 11:15, 14 June 2014 (UTC)
    • Knew it was something like that, but I am not familiar with CBC. All well done so far. Thanks, Matty.007 11:21, 14 June 2014 (UTC)
• Mention dark/light blue nicknames?
  • Done. The Rambling Man (talk) 11:15, 14 June 2014 (UTC)
• Can't find where Colin Smith won silver for Great Britain, while Ante Kušurin rowed for Croatia, New Zealander George Bridgewater won a bronze in the coxless pair, Sjoerd Hamburger rowed for The Netherlands and Alex Hearne for the United States is referenced in the source given
  • Lazy on my behalf, refs now added. The Rambling Man (talk) 11:44, 14 June 2014 (UTC)
• Can't find to Oxford's three in the ref (may be my mistake)
  • In the crew listings, a Blue is indicated with an asterisk, I count three for Oxford and five for Cambridge. The Rambling Man (talk) 11:29, 14 June 2014 (UTC)
• Umpire Rankov: perhaps link to Boris Rankov?
  • Done. The Rambling Man (talk) 11:27, 14 June 2014 (UTC)
• two-thirds of a length up: up to ahead?
  • Replace up with ahead. The Rambling Man (talk) 11:30, 14 June 2014 (UTC)
• Mention whom the Chiswick Eyot clash was between (in [1])
  • Done. The Rambling Man (talk) 11:33, 14 June 2014 (UTC)
• Oxford won the Women's Boat Race, hosted at Henley on 22 March 2014: lengths?
  • Done. The Rambling Man (talk) 11:27, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

I think that's all I have issue with. Thanks, Matty.007 10:48, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

Done, thanks so much for the review. The Rambling Man (talk) 11:44, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

That's all:

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):

   Please can the lead be expanded a bit so it isn't two one sentence paragraphs? Then good

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

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:

Just lead expansion a little please. Thanks, Matty.007 12:21, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

Done, I think. Thanks again. The Rambling Man (talk) 13:10, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

Yes, all looks good, thanks for the prompt responses. Passing now. Best, Matty.007 18:50, 15 June 2014 (UTC)