Jump to content

Talk:Aly Raisman/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review

[edit]

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

Reviewer: Arconning (talk · contribs) 15:03, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I'm Arconning and I will be reviewing the article, Aly Raisman, if you have any questions about my review just inquire down below in the discussion section!

  1. Well-written:
  2. Criteria Notes Result
    (a) (prose)
    • In event finals, she placed..., change to In the event finals, she placed....
      • Done.
    • a scholarship to University of Florida, change to a scholarship to the University of Florida.
      • Done.
    • During the first night of women's gymnastics competition, change to During the first night of the women's gymnastics competition.
      • Done.
    • Raisman and the U.S. women, does not specify which U.S. women, suggest changing to Raisman and the rest of the U.S. team or something similar.
      • Done.
    • In the all-around final, placed second, add Raisman or she before placed second.
      • Done.
    • Aly Raisman: Darkness to Light a documentary, add comma after Light.
      • Done.
    • Comcast SportsNet titled Aly Raisman: Quest for Gold. and Raisman released her memoir book Fierce: How Competing for Myself Changed Everything., add colon after titled and book respectively.
    (b) (MoS)
    • second on balance beam and She also placed third on the balance beam, would like to know the consistency with the use of "the".
      • Done.
    • In June, Raisman competed at the National Championships in St. Louis. She placed third in the all-around and finished first on beam and floor. At the beginning of July, Raisman placed third all-around at the Olympic Trials in San Jose, California. She also placed first on balance beam and floor., understood that they're both terminologies for the same apparatus but I suggest it should be using consistently within the article to avoid confusion. Same issues can be found with terms such as floor and floor exercise.
  3. Verifiable with no original research:
  4. Criteria Notes Result
    (a) (references)
    (b) (citations to reliable sources)
    (c) (original research)
    • Hold for check.
      • [1], seems dodgy.
        • Checked, pass.
    (d) (copyvio and plagiarism)
    • Earwig turns up nothing for reliable sources, hold for manual spot-check.
  5. Broad in its coverage:
  6. Criteria Notes Result
    (a) (major aspects) Reviewer has no notes here.
    (b) (focused) Everything looks focused on the articles topic.
  7. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
  8. Notes Result
    Everything looks neutral.
  9. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
  10. Notes Result
    Article is stable, no ongoing edit war or content disputes.
  11. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
  12. Criteria Notes Result
    (a) (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales) All images follow criteria.
    (b) (appropriate use with suitable captions)

Result

[edit]
Result Notes
Putting my stamp of approval on this article!

Discussion

[edit]

@Riley1012 I hope that the problems in the article could be improved soon! In around seven days or so since the article looks ready to be a Good Article but needs to fit a bit more criteria! Good luck to the fellow editors in the project! Arconning (talk · contribs) 15:00, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the review Arconning. I believe everything has been addressed. -Riley1012 (talk) 23:40, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]