Talk:Ronnie O'Sullivan/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: BLUE_DOG^TN 22:16, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose quality:

   B. MoS compliance:

   Juan Martin del Potro was approved, which is far more evasive of the WP:SIZERULE, so nothing wrong except that!BLUE_DOG^TN 23:55, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. References to sources:

   For most of the article yes.BLUE_DOG^TN 23:55, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

   B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

   If fixed with refs at the ends of each sentence then it will be accomplished, which the nominator is working on.BLUE_DOG^TN 23:55, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

   C. No original research:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   B. Focused:

   I would have to say it has family stuff in the article about his father and mother going to jail, which is not about this man's WP:Notability, which he is known for his snooker alone not being a son of a father in jail for a murder or a mother for tax evasion, which could very well violate WP:NPOV even if it is WP:V!23:29, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

   Go look at, WP:NPF, which is a WP:BLP component!BLUE_DOG^TN 00:01, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

   The paragraph on his father's ownership of a sex shop and arrest has nothing to do with him at all, and his mothers tax evasion is not his problem or about him either go look at Mark Ingram, Jr. page, which does not report that his father is in the slammer! Oh, and by the way, Elin Nordegren does not have anything about her not wearing her wedding ring or Tiger's Mistresses, but just says they are working on the marriage after the infidelity and car wreck happened! The reason it is reported on her page is because she is WP:Notability to have an article. O'Sullivan's parents are not, and his parents actions or businesses has no bearing on his notability, which means it must be removed!BLUE_DOG^TN 00:17, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

   Have removed information about his parents. Armbrust ^Talk _Contribs 00:37, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

4. Is it neutral?

   Go look at the aboved under Focused!BLUE_DOG^TN 23:55, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

   Fair representation without bias:

5. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

   Their has been some so-called vandalism by anon IP users, which is typical of an unprotected article, and this has been reverted by experience users on behalf of WP:POV to be neutral!BLUE_DOG^TN 23:29, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

   A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

   I think the image is okay, but I would love to see the release from the photographer or owner of the images copyrightBLUE_DOG^TN 23:29, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

   It does provide a copyright summary, which is all the standard for inclusion on wikipedia, so I will approve it!BLUE_DOG^TN 01:18, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

   B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:

   This is easy to fix, which is the picture in the infobox needs to have alt text.BLUE_DOG^TN 23:55, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

   Fixed. Armbrust ^Talk _Contribs 00:45, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail: I am going to pass this article because it satisfies the criterion for WP:GAN, and the nominator has addressed any major and minor concerns with the article from the above discussion. I feel it will be a good article for WP:Snooker to follow to make other suitable articles for this distinction. So, I am going to Pass this article!BLUE_DOG^TN 01:39, 21 February 2010 (UTC)