Talk:2019 Shanghai Masters

Latest comment: 4 years ago by MWright96 in topic GA Review
Good article2019 Shanghai Masters has been listed as one of the Sports and recreation good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Good topic star2019 Shanghai Masters is part of the 2019–20 snooker season series, a good topic. This is identified as among the best series of articles produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
February 13, 2020Good article nomineeListed
October 13, 2022Good topic candidatePromoted
Current status: Good article

GA Review

edit
This review is transcluded from Talk:2019 Shanghai Masters/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: MWright96 (talk · contribs) 12:59, 12 February 2020 (UTC)Reply

Going to review. MWright96 (talk) 12:59, 12 February 2020 (UTC)Reply

  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose):   b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):  
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (reference section):   b (citations to reliable sources):   c (OR):  
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects):   b (focused):  
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:  
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:  
  6. 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):  
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:  

General

edit
  • All of the hyphens in the prose and references should be replaced by en dashes
Done Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 19:27, 13 February 2020 (UTC)Reply

Lead

edit
I don't see this as an improvement - Do we need the extra word? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 19:32, 13 February 2020 (UTC)Reply

Overview

edit

Prize fund

edit
  • The highest break and the total prize fund figures are not mentioned in the two sources attached to it. Another source is required to verify it

Tournament summary

edit

References

edit

Century breaks

edit
  • "Barry Hawkins completed the highest break of the event, a 142." - better; Barry Hawkins completed the tournament's highest break of 142 in the fourth frame of his second round match against John Higgins.

Overall there are sections of text that are not verified because they have the incorrect reference attached to it or not mentioned by the sources at all. There are also some references which are duplicates of another and prose issues are present. Will put on hold for the time being. MWright96 (talk) 14:06, 12 February 2020 (UTC)Reply