This page is an archive. Do not edit the contents of this page. Please direct any additional comments to the current main page. |
Promoted to A-Class by Grahamec (talk) 10:26, 21 September 2015 (UTC) — Preceding comment added by Evad37 [talk] 12:57, 21 September 2015 (UTC)
Toolbox |
---|
Australia women's national wheelchair basketball team at the 2012 Summer Paralympics (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) review
Review
|
---|
Signing up to review this article. |'ve had a quick look through and my initial impressions are that it seems quite good, though perhaps a little heavy on quotations – but more to come on this and other things later in the actual review, after I've more thorough look through (hopefully (Sorry that I'm so late with this review.) Since this is A-class I'm going to skip most of the minor style nitpicks which can be fixed during (or before) a FA nomination. Other issues: Overall, there are a lot of statistics tables throughout the article – have you considered making the Australia stats for each game collapsible, and collapsed by default? This might improve the readability of the article while retaining the relevant stats for those who are interested.
The article is looking pretty good otherwise. - Evad37 [talk] 02:01, 24 August 2015 (UTC)
|
Support - Evad37 [talk] 00:41, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
Support: G'day, sports articles aren't my forte, but I had a look anyway. I believe that this is probably up to snuff for an A-class, and have the following comments/suggestions:
Support - I've no idea about this topic but in the interests in trying to get WP:AUS A class off the ground I'll chime in:
Note: This article needs an image review, and a source review for formatting/reliability - Evad37 [talk] 04:44, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
Support however the following issues need to be addressed:
I hope that helps. Dan arndt (talk) 06:32, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
I am mainly going to concentrate on images and licences.
In short, no serious problems. I would recommend converting that PNG to a JPEG or other format more suitable for photographic images. I also think that the images are not evenly distributed throughout the article, and the bottom of the article looks a little bare compared to the top half, although I also realise that you're limited to working with what is available to you. Lankiveil (speak to me) 10:08, 15 September 2015 (UTC).
Toolbox |
---|
Great Northern Highway (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) review
Review by Dough4872
|
---|
I will review the article. Dough4872 19:12, 16 January 2015 (UTC) Comments:
|
Completed review
|
---|
I will handle the image review. --Rschen7754 01:34, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
|
I feel really badly that this nomination has dragged on this long. I've been wanting to review it, but I've been busy lately. If it keeps dragging on I will eventually review it, but if someone else wants to, feel free to take it. --Rschen7754 23:04, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
Source review by Imzadi1979
|
---|
A couple of quick comments to start. All of the footnotes use the same date formats, so that's good. A couple of general comments though:
Now that those formatting comments are out of the way, I can say that every source is appropriately reliable for use in an article on Wikipedia. They're all good maps, good newspaper articles, books, or government publications that pass our basic reliability tests. So if the formatting is polished up, this should have no problems with any future FAC. Imzadi 1979 → 05:02, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
|
I'll admit upfront that this review will probably be really slow and might take a month, just because I have so little time right now... but I think it's better than Evad having to wait another 3 months for the review to be closed (which would likely happen otherwise). So, I'll break this up into small pieces.
This completes the review. --Rschen7754 21:42, 17 October 2015 (UTC)