Talk:Vanuatu at the 2004 Summer Olympics

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Vanuatu at the 2004 Summer Olympics/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Jaguar (talk · contribs) 18:02, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

I should have this to you by tomorrow JAGUAR  18:02, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose is "clear and concise", without copyvios, or spelling and grammar errors:

   B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. Has an appropriate reference section:

   B. Citation to reliable sources where necessary:

   C. No original research:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   B. Focused:

4. Is it neutral?

   Fair representation without bias:

5. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

   A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:

   B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

Initial comments

• The lead should be expanded to reach a minimum of two paragraphs so it can comply per WP:LEAD and also help with the organisation of this article

• I have done a bit of work on the lead. I admit that two of the paragraphs might be a bit short, so I will continue to work on it.

• "Usually, an NOC would be able to" - a NOC, or even "the" would work

•  Done

• "or 1 athlete per event if they met the "B" standard" - one athlete

•  Done

• What are the "A" and "B" standards for athletes? This should be explained somewhere in the article for people unfamiliar

•  Done. At least I think it is.

• This article is a bit too short, and therefore may not be as comprehensive as the GA critera 3(a) is looking for. I would recommend any small expansion if possible but if this is not possible I'm willing to let this go as I believe the reliable sources implemented in this article are make it broad as it is

• Done some work on it. Let me know if it needs to be expanded more.

References

• No dead links

On hold

I know this is a short review but it is a compact article, so I'll leave this on hold until everything can be clarified. I suggested an expansion of the lead and anywhere else in the article (if possible) as it may not meet the broadness part of the criteria at this time. But let me know if you have any questions, good luck JAGUAR  18:56, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

@Jaguar: Thanks for the review. For now, I have worked on the lead. Should be able to solve the other issues once I get the time to do so. Good888 (talk) 10:46, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

@Jaguar: Right, I believe I have dealt with all the issues. Let me know if there are any more that need to be fixed. Good888 (talk) 14:57, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

Close - promoted

Thanks for the expansion made, Good888! The article looks much better now and now complies per the GA criteria, so I'll promote this. I think I'll review São Tomé and Príncipe at the 2004 Summer Olympics too, although it might look like a similar review JAGUAR  15:08, 12 May 2015 (UTC)