Article (
|
visual edit |
history) ·
Article talk (
|
history) ·
Watch
The article gets the presumption of 
for all six criteria (since it is currently already GA) unless I give an explanation pointing to the contrary.
- It is reasonably well written.
- a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (
MoS for
lead,
layout,
word choice,
fiction, and
lists):
- The prose/writing is fine. But the article structure seems very confusing and unprofessional--
- “International career” and “domestic career” sections do not make sense! —Why is 2016 domestic achievements after 2019 World Cup? All his career highlights should be chronologically listed.
- “Injury problems” subsection contains non-injury related info.
- “Personal life” section should be separate from “early life” and placed later in the article.
- “Playing style” should be merged into a “career” section.
- “Records and achievements” would look better either in paragraphs or wikitable, not bullet points.
- a (prose, spelling, and grammar):
- It is factually accurate and
verifiable.
- a (
reference section): b (citations to
reliable sources): c (
OR): d (
copyvio and
plagiarism):
- a (
reference section):
- It is broad in its coverage.
- a (
major aspects): b (
focused):
- a (
major aspects):
- It follows the
neutral point of view policy.
- Fair representation without bias:
- Fair representation without bias:
- It is stable.
- No edit wars, etc.:
- Lack of article stability: update required? I’m no cricket expert, maybe someone else can shed a light on whether this article contains the subject’s latest career stats.
- No edit wars, etc.:
- It is illustrated by
images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
- a (images are tagged and non-free content have
fair use rationales): b (
appropriate use with
suitable captions):
- Another photo of the subject from his early life, if one is available, would be lovely.
- a (images are tagged and non-free content have
fair use rationales):
- Overall:
- Pass/Fail:
- I'll try to fix stuff to the best of my ability. The last thing I want to do is to delist this or any GA. I have reached out to the nominator and major editors, and let's get this article back to GA standards!
- Pass/Fail:
- @
Nemoschool: How is this going? Ready to close it yet?
AIRcorn
(talk) 10:36, 15 January 2020 (UTC)
- Obviously abandoned. In two minds on this. I don't think it is terribly out of date as not much cricket (or sport in general) has been played this year. I don't like the prose though. Seeing as this has been left in limbo for so long I am going to close as no consensus. If another editor is willing to take on a GA reassessment they are welcome to AIRcorn (talk) 21:56, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
Article (
|
visual edit |
history) ·
Article talk (
|
history) ·
Watch
The article gets the presumption of for all six criteria (since it is currently already GA) unless I give an explanation pointing to the contrary.
- It is reasonably well written.
- a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (
MoS for
lead,
layout,
word choice,
fiction, and
lists):
- The prose/writing is fine. But the article structure seems very confusing and unprofessional--
- “International career” and “domestic career” sections do not make sense! —Why is 2016 domestic achievements after 2019 World Cup? All his career highlights should be chronologically listed.
- “Injury problems” subsection contains non-injury related info.
- “Personal life” section should be separate from “early life” and placed later in the article.
- “Playing style” should be merged into a “career” section.
- “Records and achievements” would look better either in paragraphs or wikitable, not bullet points.
- a (prose, spelling, and grammar):
- It is factually accurate and
verifiable.
- a (
reference section): b (citations to
reliable sources): c (
OR): d (
copyvio and
plagiarism):
- a (
reference section):
- It is broad in its coverage.
- a (
major aspects): b (
focused):
- a (
major aspects):
- It follows the
neutral point of view policy.
- Fair representation without bias:
- Fair representation without bias:
- It is stable.
- No edit wars, etc.:
- Lack of article stability: update required? I’m no cricket expert, maybe someone else can shed a light on whether this article contains the subject’s latest career stats.
- No edit wars, etc.:
- It is illustrated by
images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
- a (images are tagged and non-free content have
fair use rationales): b (
appropriate use with
suitable captions):
- Another photo of the subject from his early life, if one is available, would be lovely.
- a (images are tagged and non-free content have
fair use rationales):
- Overall:
- Pass/Fail:
- I'll try to fix stuff to the best of my ability. The last thing I want to do is to delist this or any GA. I have reached out to the nominator and major editors, and let's get this article back to GA standards!
- Pass/Fail:
- @
Nemoschool: How is this going? Ready to close it yet?
AIRcorn
(talk) 10:36, 15 January 2020 (UTC)
- Obviously abandoned. In two minds on this. I don't think it is terribly out of date as not much cricket (or sport in general) has been played this year. I don't like the prose though. Seeing as this has been left in limbo for so long I am going to close as no consensus. If another editor is willing to take on a GA reassessment they are welcome to AIRcorn (talk) 21:56, 22 October 2020 (UTC)