GA Review

[edit]

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

Nominator: BeanieFan11 (talk · contribs) 15:39, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: PearlyGigs (talk · contribs) 05:42, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Starting review

[edit]

Hi, BeanieFan11, I'll review this. Hope to come back soon. Best wishes. PearlyGigs (talk) 05:42, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Criteria

[edit]
  1. Well written. I have done a small amount of copyediting which I thought would help but, really, the prose is fine and there are no spelling, grammar, or syntax issues. The lead is short but I think it presents a fair summary of the content, and it certainly underlines Rosemary's notability. I'm afraid, however, that I do have a reservation about the article's layout/structure (see below), so I can't yet pass this criterion.
  2. WP:V and WP:NOR. The reflist is good and the citations are presented in standard publishing format. No problems in this area and certainly no evidence of original research or copyright issues.
  3. Breadth of coverage. Focus is within scope and the coverage is adequate given the limited information available in sources.
  4. Neutral. No problems.
  5. Stability. No problems.
  6. Images. Only the portrait but it is sufficient and it is fair use.

I think we the biography section should be split into two or three sections covering her early life and career; the main part of her career; and then her death and legacy. As the article is a biography, I think using the word as a section head is unnecessary. I'll have to leave that with you.

Out of interest, is there any information about what actually happened to Rosemary? She was only 35 and her death seems to have been very sudden, given that she was still competing in 1974.

I'll put the review on hold for now. It's a very interesting read and I hope more information can be found eventually. PearlyGigs (talk) 12:20, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]