Talk:Tony Knowles (snooker player)/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Tayi Arajakate (talk · contribs) 17:09, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

• Hello BennyOnTheLoose, I'll be taking up the review for this nomination and will present it to you in a couple of days. I hope you will find my feedback to be helpful. Cheers! Tayi Arajakate _Talk 17:09, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

  BennyOnTheLoose, apologies for having delayed this for so long. The article more or less complies with the good article criteria except a handful minor issues. So I'm going to go ahead and pass this but do take note of the comments below. Tayi Arajakate _Talk 11:24, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

  Many thanks, Tayi Arajakate. I've made some changes as noted below. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 09:43, 3 February 2022 (UTC)

  Looks good now, I've updated the assessment table below. Tayi Arajakate _Talk 09:31, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

Comments

• "...first wound of the 1981 World Snooker Championship...", typo.
  • Amended. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 09:40, 3 February 2022 (UTC)
• "... Reardon by the same score in round two ... Ray Reardon (the second seed) ...", the first mention of Reardon should contain his full name and be wikilinked, instead of the second mention.
  • Amended. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 09:40, 3 February 2022 (UTC)
• This is just a minor quibble and feel free to take this more as a suggestion; most last paragraph of the career section could perhaps be integrated in the chronological order that the rest of the section follows? For example, his highest ranking only appears in the last paragraph even though some of his other rankings is mentioned from time to time in a chronological order.
• Another suggestion would be that if possible, the section on his career could be expanded further? It appears more as major highlights rather than a comprehensive chronology. For instance, the section on performance and rankings timeline contains many tournaments which don't feature in the section on career.
• The lead should perhaps mention that he is commonly or alternatively called Tony.
  • I've had a look at some other "Tony" GAs and on balance I've not amended for this, per MOS:HYPOCORISM. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 09:40, 3 February 2022 (UTC)
• His team members in the 1983 World Team Classic are only mentioned in the lead.
  • Amended. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 09:40, 3 February 2022 (UTC)

Assessment

1. Comprehension: The comprehension is good.
Pass

Criteria	Notes	Result
(a) (prose)	The prose is clear and concise. (Updated)	Pass
(b) (MoS)	The article follows the manual of style. (Updated)	Pass

2. Verifiability: The article is verifiable.
Pass

Criteria	Notes	Result
(a) (references)	The article has a list of references and in-line citations for all its lines.	Pass
(b) (citations to reliable sources)	Sources used are reliable.	Pass
(c) (original research)	No original research or synthesis found.	Pass
(d) (copyvio and plagiarism)	No copyright violation or plagiarism found.	Pass

3. Comprehensiveness: The article is comprehensive enough for the good article criteria.
Pass

Criteria	Notes	Result
(a) (major aspects)	The article may have some scope for expansion.	Neutral
(b) (focused)	The article remains on topic without unnecessary deviations.	Pass

4. Neutrality: The article is neutral.
Pass

Notes	Result
The article is compliant with the policy on neutral point of view.	Pass

5. Stability: The article is stable.
Pass

Notes	Result
There is no ongoing edit warring or content disputes.	Pass

6. Illustration: The article is well illustrated.
Pass

Criteria	Notes	Result
(a) (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales)	Image appropriately tagged.	Pass
(b) (appropriate use with suitable captions)	Caption is suitable.	Pass