GA Review

:This review is transcluded from Talk:Stade Roland Garros/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer:   

GA review (see here for criteria)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose):  b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): 
 Lead should be 3 paragraphs
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references):  b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR): 
 Pretty sure that Gem is a fan site. Location section completly unsourced. Tenniseum and clay courts relies on one source, could be a copyvio. Too many unsourced things
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects):  b (focused): 
 Too much player info imo. This is about the stadia not the players
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias: 
 
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.: 
 
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): 
 Is there not a shot showing the whole complex. Also if not shouldn't PC be the court in the picture and not SL.
Overall: 
Pass/Fail: 
 

Out of date in expansion v relocation as a result has been announced.