Talk:2003 Insight Bowl/GA1

GA Review

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): 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:

   Some very minor issues with judgements on play results... i.e.: "Unfortunately for the Bears..." but otherwise maintains equal focus on both teams without cheerleading for either.

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   A very well written article. Compares well with existing GA articles on single games. Resolute 18:51, 14 July 2008 (UTC)