Talk:Kathleen O'Kelly-Kennedy

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Good articleKathleen O'Kelly-Kennedy 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.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
July 5, 2013Good article nomineeListed
Did You Know
A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on June 22, 2013.
The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that Kathleen O'Kelly-Kennedy and Melanie Domaschenz were part of the Gliders team that won the Osaka Cup for the fifth time in 2013?
On this day...A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on June 21, 2023.

Requested move

[edit]
The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved. EdJohnston (talk) 16:47, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Kathleen O'kelly-KennedyKathleen O'Kelly-Kennedy – Her name has been misspelled in the article title. Someone has created a redirect, but her name should be spelled corrected per WP:BLP Hawkeye7 (talk) 22:03, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

GA Review

[edit]
This review is transcluded from Talk:Kathleen O'Kelly-Kennedy/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: The Rambling Man (talk · contribs) 17:30, 30 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

The Rambling Man (talk) 17:40, 30 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

GAN criteria

[edit]
GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
    Above comments cover the issues I've noted.
  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:

Comment on hold until the above issues are resolved. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:40, 30 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nearly there, just that one pending issue on the amputation. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:32, 2 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Kathleen O'Kelly-Kennedy. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:11, 7 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]