# Talk:Dawson Creek Rage

This review is transcluded from Talk:Dawson Creek Rage/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Seabuckthorn (talk · contribs) 03:29, 8 February 2014 (UTC)
Nominator: maclean (talk)
Hi! My review for this article will be here shortly.  --Seabuckthorn ♥ 03:29, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

1: Well-written

a. Prose is "clear and concise", without copyvios, or spelling and grammar errors: 
b. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:  

2: Verifiable with no original research

a. Has an appropriate reference section:  Yes
b. Citation to reliable sources where necessary:  excellent (Thorough check on Google.)

c. No original research:   Done

3: Broad in its coverage

4: Neutral

5: Stable: No edit wars, etc:  Yes
6: Images  Done (NFC with a valid FUR)

I'm glad to see your work here. I do have some insights based on the above checklist that I think will improve the article: 

I think the lead can be improved in order to provide an accessible overview and to give relative emphasis.
1a issue:  A full stop is missing at the end of the first para in the lead.

Besides that, I think the article looks excellent. Maclean, please feel free to strike out any recommendation from this review which you think will not help in improving the article which is our main aim here. All the best,  --Seabuckthorn ♥ 13:39, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Response from maclean25
Thanks for reading and reviewing the article. I have improved the lead section as follows: [1]
My strategy there is to have the first paragraph about who the team is and what they did, with the second paragraph noting ancillary or background info.
From the "Formation" section the lead notes where they played, attempts to get the team into other leagues and the reasons why the other leagues wouldn't take them.
From the "Team history" section the lead provides a brief overview of how each season went.
From "Dissolution", the lead notes the next attempt at moving into a different league, attendance, and high expenses. —maclean (talk) 22:56, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
Thanks! Promoting the article to GA status.  --Seabuckthorn ♥ 02:36, 10 February 2014 (UTC)