Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles/Recruitment Centre/Recruiter Central/Archives/Royroydeb

Status: In Progress

Date Started: 16 September 2013

Date Ended:

Step one

Please familiarize yourself with Wikipedia:Good article criteria and Wikipedia:What the Good article criteria are not. Then tell me when you're done so we can move onto the next step, which consists of a quiz. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 15:52, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for me late response, I gone through it.You may proceed.RRD13 (talk) 16:03, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Step two

Take the quiz below. You must score at least an 80% (5 out of 7) to pass.

1. What manual of style guidelines must an article comply with in order to be a GA?

It means a lot of things.There should be appropriate headings.For example in a footballer's article instead of putting everything inside a Career heading it should be further divided into the clubs he has played for.The headings should be nouns like Chelsea instead of His time at Chelsea.

Appropriate headings is just one aspect of following the MOS; it also includes appropriate lead sections, avoidance of words to watch, writing about fiction, and correct list incorporation. 1/2 point.

2. What is required for neutrality in a GA?

Neutrality means the article should be written from a neutral point of view.

O points, although I might have not been clear in what I meant about the question. What does "a neutral point of view" mean? It means that viewpoints are presented fairly and without bias, without giving more weight to one viewpoint over another.

3. What does the GA criteria mean about a GA being "broad in its coverage"?

Broad in its coverage I bet it means that the article is focused on the person/thing it is concerned about instead of having irrelevant stuffs.

I'll give you this one, but broadness also includes addressing the main topics of the subject, without leaving anything out.

4. What is meant by stability in the GA criteria?

Stability means that there should not be regular edit wars going on it like one happened in https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sanju_Pradhan&action=history.

Correct.

5. Images in GAs require the following:

They are tagged with their copyright status.
They have valid fair use rationales for non-free content.
They are relevant to the topic.
They have suitable captions.
All of the above.
None of the above.

e all of the above

Correct

6. True or false: Stand-alone lists can be classified as GAs.

Never

Correct.

7. When does an article lose its status as a GA?

When it becomes a Featured Article.

1 point, but also when it's reassessed and found to no longer fulfill the GA criteria.

Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 18:48, 4 October 2013 (UTC) RRD13 (talk) 17:20, 7 October 2013 (UTC) 5 1/2 points out of 7. You passed, but only just. Perhaps it's just a matter of test taking, but I suggest that you work on knowing the criteria more, and that we both look out for it as we go along. At any rate, let's move forward, shall we? Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 19:16, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Step three

First review

R, I don't believe in repeating myself, so I direct you here [1], which is my commentary on some GAs I recently reviewed for another recruitee. Let me know if that's enough. How we proceed is totally up to you: I can model another GA for you, or we can move onto you reviewing your own GA. Just let me know! Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 19:30, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Before we proceed I just wanna ask you that some references in articles are books.So how can we confirm that the facts are accurate?RRD13 (talk) 11:28, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That's correct. Many articles, in order to be comprehensive (or for GAs, broad), require using books as sources. Google Books and Amazon.com have parts of books that you can look at. Of course, if you wanted to ensure that all sources are used correctly, you'd have to go to the library and look it up, but I don't recommend that, especially for GAs. I tend to assume good faith with editors, and state that in a review. Spot checks, even for FA reviews, are good enough, since if someone plagiarizes or paraphrases too closely, it will probably be endemic throughout the entire article. In other words, if an editor misuses a source a couple of times, he or she will probably misuse sources throughout an article. I suggest looking at a few sources that are accessible on-line or in Google Books. In some cases, you may have to look at several sources, and if they are misused, you should ask the nominator to correct them, or at last resort, fail the article. I think you should read up on sources, starting here: WP:RS. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 16:35, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Gone through all of them.You may proceed.RRD13 (talk) 17:07, 31 October 2013 (UTC)The latter option.RRD13 (talk) 05:57, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]