Article (edit | visual edit | history ) · Article talk (edit | history ) · Watch
Reviewer: BlackJack (talk · contribs ) 12:05, 20 November 2016 (UTC) [ reply ]
I'll do this one. Will start soon. Jack | talk page 12:05, 20 November 2016 (UTC) [ reply ]
@BlackJack : Pardon my discourtesy, but will you be reviewing soon? Lizard (talk ) 16:02, 13 December 2016 (UTC) [ reply ]
@Lizard the Wizard : No problem, Lizard. I did intend to do this sooner rather than later but I've been busy elsewhere. Leave it with me. Thanks. Jack | talk page 16:27, 13 December 2016 (UTC) [ reply ]
No big deal, take your time. Lizard (talk ) 16:36, 13 December 2016 (UTC) [ reply ] Full review criteria checks[ edit ] GA review – see WP:WIAGA for the six good article criteria:
Is it reasonably well written ?
A. Prose is clear and concise, without copyvios, or spelling and grammar errors:
B. MoS compliance for lead , layout , words to watch , fiction , and embedded lists :
Is it factually accurate and verifiable with no original research?
A. Has an appropriate reference section :
B. Inline citations to reliable sources where necessary (e.g., direct quotations):
C. No original research :
D. No copyright violations :
Is it broad in its coverage ?
A. Scope :
B. Length :
Is it neutral ?
Fair representation without bias:
Is it stable ?
No edit wars , etc:
Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
A. Images are tagged with their copyright status , and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content :
B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions :
Well, this one is as good as it can get. It's a well-written, interesting and throroughly sourced article that fully deserves GA status so I'm passing it without any requests for improvement as, if I had any, I would be guilty of pedantic nitpicking. It is a very good article indeed about a man who was a long-term top-class player. Well done. Jack | talk page 20:30, 14 December 2016 (UTC) [ reply ]