Talk:Victor Wembanyama/GA1

Latest comment: 1 year ago by Oltrepier in topic GA Review

GA Review

edit
GA toolbox
Reviewing

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

Reviewer: Oltrepier (talk · contribs) 11:26, 23 March 2023 (UTC)Reply

Hello! I'm planning to start this review very soon, ideally later today or tomorrow. From what I've seen so far, I think the promotion of this article won't be a long shot at all, because it looks great already. Oltrepier (talk) 11:26, 23 March 2023 (UTC)Reply

GA review
(see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose, spelling, and grammar):  
    b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):  
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references):  
    b (citations to reliable sources):  
    c (OR):  
    d (copyvio and plagiarism):  
  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, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):  
    b (appropriate use with suitable captions):  

Overall:
Pass/Fail:  

  ·   ·   ·  


Final comments
@Sportzeditz: Right, I haven't got much to say, really, because the article looks excellent! Overall, you did a great job in providing reliable sources, following WP:MOS and structuring the article properly, so I definitely enjoyed reading the whole page. The article is, of course, broad and stable, and despite all of the hype surrounding Wembanyama at the moment, you managed to keep the page as neutral as possible, so that's another positive. All of the images included look fine, too.
I did notice just a few minor issues with punctuation and links, but I've mostly fixed them by myself. What I've got left to say is that a few phrases might still need to be re-tooled, and especially one from the Nanterre 92 paragraph comes to mind:
"In October, Wembanyama featured in a viral video, where at age 16, he showcased his skills in a two-on-two pick-up game against Rudy Gobert, one of the top defensive players in the world, and Vincent Poirier."
Gobert's skills are already well-known and can be found on his own article, anyway. Plus, specifying Victor's age doesn't feel necessary here. So, I would change the sentence like this: "In October of the same year, Wembanyama featured in a viral video where he showcased his skills in a two-on-two pick-up game against Rudy Gobert and Vincent Poirier." Is that OK?
Finally, I would suggest you to add one more "third-party" reference for the player's signings with ASVEL and Metropolitans 92, respectively, just to be safer.
I hope my suggestions will be clear and useful enough. Thank you for this nomination! Oltrepier (talk) 16:28, 24 March 2023 (UTC)Reply
@Oltrepier: I have edited the sentence above and added more references to each signing. Sportzeditz (talk) 16:58, 24 March 2023 (UTC)Reply
@Sportzeditz: And that should be enough to promote the article. Thank you, and congratulations! Oltrepier (talk) 17:53, 24 March 2023 (UTC)Reply