Talk:LW11/GA1

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

Reviewer: North8000 (talk · contribs) 15:17, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am starting a review of this article North8000 (talk) 15:17, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Review discussion

Article has no images. Would it be feasible to add an image? North8000 (talk) 02:28, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There is one area (IMHO important, considering the nature of the topic) which is either not covered or not clearly covered. I'm assuming that this is a particular standard the contents of which is authored and controlled by some organization. And I assume that it is implemented by bodies which run for competitions (by "implement" I mean make the decisions regarding which participant is in which class). This article really does not say or make clear who authors/controls it and who implements it. In some cases it appears that the details of the standard change with the event? Could you clarify this in the article? (and if there is more than one version of the standard, which body authors/controls the contents of each of those. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 16:14, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This was the main thing that I noted. The article looks pretty good. North8000 (talk) 16:04, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

In the definition section it says that The International Paralympic Committee (IPC) explicitly defined this classification and A national federation such as Alpine Canada handles classification for domestic competitions. Hawkeye7 (talk) 18:43, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The item that I noted is on all 5 articles. I figure we can start with LW3 as an example location to sort it out. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 13:34, 5 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved

Would it be feasible to have image of such a skier (aside from the video)? If it difficult, then that is fine. North8000 (talk) 12:22, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Added a picture of Australia's Mark Soyer. Hawkeye7 (talk) 17:48, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Cool. All set. North8000 (talk) 20:37, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You may want to look at the title someday for possible expansion. But that is not germane in this review. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 11:13, 15 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

GA criteria final checklist

Well-written

• Meets this criteria. North8000 (talk) 12:20, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Factually accurate and verifiable

• Meets this criteria. North8000 (talk) 13:26, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Broad in its coverage

• Meets this criteria North8000 (talk) 14:13, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without bias, giving due weight to each

• Meets this criteria. North8000 (talk) 14:37, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute

• Meets this criteria. Article is stable.North8000 (talk) 02:27, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Illustrated, if possible, by images

• Meets this criteria. Has one image and one video. Both are free so no article-specific use rationale is required. North8000 (talk) 20:37, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This has passed as a Wikipedia Good Article

This has passed as a Wikipedia Good Article. Congratulations! North8000 (talk) 11:14, 15 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]