Talk:Netball/GA3

GA Review

Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: ~ Don4of4 ^[Talk] 00:43, 20 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

Criteria

Good Article Status - Review Criteria

Further information: WP:WIAGA

A good article is—

Well-written:

(a) the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct; and

(b) it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.^[1]

Verifiable with no original research:

(a) it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline;

(b) reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose);^[2] and

(c) it contains no original research.

Broad in its coverage:

(a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic;^[3] and

(b) it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).

Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.

^[4]

Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:

^[5]

(a) media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content; and

(b) media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.^[6]

Review

Well-written:

Criteria	Notes	Result
(a) (prose)	Multiple issues exist: Inconsistent capitalization Improper capitalization Missing articles Words do not flow in the lead Poor wording in areas (such as "Description and rules") Transitions needed in areas Metric units are incorrectly pluralized in areas Words and/or phrases are used repeatedly (e.g. in "Description and rules")	Fail
(b) (MoS)	This article is missing elements: Further information: WP:FOOTERS, WP:ALSO, and WP:FNNR Considering this article has children articles, these sections are probably needed.	Fail

Verifiable with no original research:

Criteria	Notes	Result
(a) (references)	References need to be in order. So this is bad: ^[8][2]	Fail
(b) (citations to reliable sources)	This has improved since last time...	Pass
(c) (original research)	The reviewer has no notes here.	Pass

Broad in its coverage:

Criteria	Notes	Result
(a) (major aspects)	The reviewer has no notes here.	Pass
(b) (focused)	This article is rambling! This article needs to be in summary style. Further information: WP:SUMMARY	Fail

Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.

Notes	Result
The reviewer has no notes here.	Pass

Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.

Notes	Result
The reviewer has no notes here.	Pass

Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:

Criteria	Notes	Result
(a) (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales)	No issues here.	Pass
(b) (appropriate use with suitable captions)	Some of the captions are weak. (Look for: "A player","A netball","Local mixed")	Fail

Result

Result	Notes
Fail	This article needs a major revision and copyediting. It does not qualify for WP:GA status nor does it meet Wikipedia standards. Please help to improve this article by correcting the above issues. Once it is ready, send me a message on my talk page and I will expedite the approval.

Discussion

Please add any related discussion here.

Additional Notes

↑ Compliance with other aspects of the Manual of Style, or the Manual of Style mainpage or subpages of the guides listed, is not required for good articles.
↑ Either parenthetical references or footnotes can be used for in-line citations, but not both in the same article.
↑ This requirement is significantly weaker than the "comprehensiveness" required of featured articles; it allows shorter articles, articles that do not cover every major fact or detail, and overviews of large topics.
↑ Vandalism reversions, proposals to split or merge content, good faith improvements to the page (such as copy editing), and changes based on reviewers' suggestions do not apply. Nominations for articles that are unstable because of constructive editing should be placed on hold.
↑ Other media, such as video and sound clips, are also covered by this criterion.
↑ The presence of images is not, in itself, a requirement. However, if images (or other media) with acceptable copyright status are appropriate and readily available, then some such images should be provided.

Add topic

[1] Compliance with other aspects of the Manual of Style, or the Manual of Style mainpage or subpages of the guides listed, is not required for good articles.

[2] Either parenthetical references or footnotes can be used for in-line citations, but not both in the same article.

[3] This requirement is significantly weaker than the "comprehensiveness" required of featured articles; it allows shorter articles, articles that do not cover every major fact or detail, and overviews of large topics.

[4] Vandalism reversions, proposals to split or merge content, good faith improvements to the page (such as copy editing), and changes based on reviewers' suggestions do not apply. Nominations for articles that are unstable because of constructive editing should be placed on hold.

[5] Other media, such as video and sound clips, are also covered by this criterion.

[6] The presence of images is not, in itself, a requirement. However, if images (or other media) with acceptable copyright status are appropriate and readily available, then some such images should be provided.

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]