Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
This article has been reviewed as part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles/Project quality task force. I believe the article is brilliant, currently meets the criteria and should remain listed as a Good article. The article history has been updated to reflect this review. Regards,--Jackyd101 (talk) 17:30, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• It is reasonably well written.

  a (prose): b (MoS):

The prose is OK, 7/10.

• It is factually accurate and verifiable.

  a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

• It is broad in its coverage.

  a (major aspects): b (focused):

• The material about his wife and children listed on the talk page should be updated and readded immediately.
• "as a result of academic problems." - which were?

• It follows the neutral point of view policy.

  a (fair representation): b (all significant views):

• It is stable.

  

• It contains images, where possible, to illustrate the topic.

  a (tagged and captioned): b (lack of images does not in itself exclude GA): c (non-free images have fair use rationales):

• Overall:

  a Pass/Fail:

I agree with the assessment of the prose. I will undertake a re-write of the entire page to make a push for A-level. Any feedback from the moderator or the community-at-large would be helpful. I'm a good proofreader, but I can always stand to improve. RHarnden86 (talk) 02:34, 23 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I've removed the preceding comment from this talk page, which had nothing to do with the subject. I have located some information regarding Wade's academic eligibility issue from his first year at Marquette. RHarnden86 (talk) 04:35, 23 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]