Talk:George Webster (presenter)

Latest comment: 2 months ago by IntentionallyDense in topic GA Review

Did you know nomination

edit
The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by AirshipJungleman29 talk 13:10, 9 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Webster, Briony May Williams, and Shani Dhanda in a 2021 Mencap video
Moved to mainspace by Launchballer (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 230 past nominations.

Launchballer 10:01, 30 May 2024 (UTC).Reply

  • Starting review
General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
  • Cited:  
  • Interesting:  
QPQ: Done.

Overall:   Valereee (talk) 20:08, 5 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

  Charming article, charming hook, wish we had a photo! Valereee (talk) 20:22, 5 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

I don't really understand copyright at all, although this YouTube video from Mencap seems to be marked as Creative Commons?--Launchballer 23:36, 5 June 2024 (UTC)Reply
Hm...Mencap is believable as the copyright owner, and it's always fun to have a video as the image. Valereee (talk) 14:08, 6 June 2024 (UTC)Reply
Added to the article and here.--Launchballer 15:53, 6 June 2024 (UTC)Reply


S.A.M.

edit

Launchballer I think S.A.M. is a fairly obscure film, so I have tweaked the wording to introduce it, please tweak further if necessary. TSventon (talk) 11:05, 30 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

GA Review

edit

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:George Webster (presenter)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Launchballer (talk · contribs) 12:57, 15 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Reviewer: IntentionallyDense (talk · contribs) 21:11, 7 October 2024 (UTC)Reply


I will review this soon. IntentionallyDense (talk) 21:11, 7 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

Rate Attribute Review Comment
1. Well-written:
  1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct. Prose is good. I have no complaints here. IntentionallyDense (talk) 02:35, 9 October 2024 (UTC)Reply
  1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. Lead looks good. No concerns. IntentionallyDense (talk) 02:35, 9 October 2024 (UTC)Reply
2. Verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check:
  2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline. IntentionallyDense (talk) 21:24, 7 October 2024 (UTC)Reply
  2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose). See comments below. Otherwise, I checked about half the sources and found no issues. IntentionallyDense (talk) 21:24, 7 October 2024 (UTC)Reply
  2c. it contains no original research. IntentionallyDense (talk) 21:24, 7 October 2024 (UTC)Reply
  2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism. IntentionallyDense (talk) 21:24, 7 October 2024 (UTC)Reply
3. Broad in its coverage:
  3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic. IntentionallyDense (talk) 02:35, 9 October 2024 (UTC)Reply
  3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style). IntentionallyDense (talk) 02:35, 9 October 2024 (UTC)Reply
  4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each. IntentionallyDense (talk) 02:35, 9 October 2024 (UTC)Reply
  5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. IntentionallyDense (talk) 21:24, 7 October 2024 (UTC)Reply
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
  6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content. IntentionallyDense (talk) 21:24, 7 October 2024 (UTC)Reply
  6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. IntentionallyDense (talk) 21:24, 7 October 2024 (UTC)Reply
  7. Overall assessment. Great work. I have no complaints here and I'm going to go ahead and pass this article. IntentionallyDense (talk) 02:35, 9 October 2024 (UTC)Reply
Cut; it's in the condition's article anyway.--Launchballer 22:52, 7 October 2024 (UTC)Reply
Sounds good. IntentionallyDense (talk) 02:30, 9 October 2024 (UTC)Reply
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.