Talk:Clifford Roach/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Vensatry (talk · contribs) 16:37, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

• I'll take up this review. Will have a look at the article tomorrow and post the initial comments soon. —Vensatry _{(Ping me)} 16:37, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

Read the article. Looks satisfactory with a a few minor issues to be slightly addressed before I pass the article.

• As in most of your articles, this one suffers from underlinking. For instance, Michael Manley may not be known outside *Trinidad. Frank Keating and Bridgette Lawrence to name a few.

• Guilty as charged! Manley and Keating done, but there is no article for Lawrence. Also linked some tours. Sarastro1 (talk) 18:56, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

• "In total, Roach scored 1,222 first-class runs at an average of 26.56": these stats are for the tour or the entire season?

• Clarified. Sarastro1 (talk) 18:56, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

• "history of West Indies cricket" is a book right. Shouldn't h be capitalised.

• Not in this case as it is not the title of the book as such. If it was, it would be in italics. Sarastro1 (talk) 18:56, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

• You've used the book A History of West Indies Cricket in the refs. Are both one and the same? —Vensatry _{(Ping me)} 07:46, 23 November 2013 (UTC)

• Yes, but I'd rather not be quoting the title like that in the article here. We'd have to have "in his A History of West Indies Cricket", which lacks a certain elegance, or "In A History of West Indies Cricket, Manley..." which does not make it clear that it is his book. If this is really such an issue that it would prevent GA status, I'll change it to the full title of the book, but I've never seen a requirement like this on wikipedia or anywhere else. Sarastro1 (talk) 11:07, 23 November 2013 (UTC)

• ESPNCricinfo->ESPNcricinfo. Also link it once in the article.

• Done, I think. Sarastro1 (talk) 18:56, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

• "rare occasions"[29]": period missing after punctuation.

• Done. Sarastro1 (talk) 18:56, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

• "A Trinidad newspaper report" it may be worth mentioning the name of the newspaper.

• Done. Sarastro1 (talk) 18:56, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

• The article states that he was also a successful footballer at the international level. Why not mention something about his football career.

• This is literally everything I was able to find in a reliable source. There is other stuff out there, but the football project advised that it was not reliable. Sarastro1 (talk) 18:56, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

• Avoid starting new paras with "He ..."

• Done, I think. Sarastro1 (talk) 18:56, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
• The article looks good overall and I'd be happy to pass once the above stated issues are fixed. —Vensatry _{(Ping me)} 05:31, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the review, and hopefully that's everything. Sarastro1 (talk) 18:56, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

Check against the criteria

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): 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):

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):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

Article passed. Congrats —Vensatry _{(Ping me)} 16:48, 23 November 2013 (UTC)