Talk:Aruba at the 2008 Summer Olympics/GA2

GA Reassessment

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

GA review (see here for criteria)

---

Based on the concerns expressed at WT:GAN, I'm reassessing this article's GA status. I'm reviewing this revision of the article.

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

   The article is so short, but if concise prose is the ruler by which we measure writing quality, this passes, sadly. There's just not much text here though to judge the quality any further.

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):

   This article is a bit too hyper-focused. The short length (no body paragraph longer than three sentences) tells me that the article is not comprehensive. I've worked on M-209 (Michigan highway), which is about a 0.543-mile (0.874 km) former state highway in my home state of Michigan, and I still wrote a longer article than this one. For this limited of a subject, I'd expect some more information on the athletes. Some basic biographical information on them, maybe their reaction to the experience at being at the games. What about budgetary expenditures by Aruba to send the athletes and participate? Did they sent coaches or other officials to Beijing? There are plenty of avenues to expand this article.

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, where possible and appropriate.

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

   Only the flags. Too bad there aren't photos of either athlete to help illustrate the article

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   Based solely on concerns over coverage, I can not, in good conscience, leave this article as a Good Article. Please add some actual content to the article before renomination. Imzadi 1979 → 12:16, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

For such a short article, I would have expected the original reviewer to have spotted two failures to comply with the GA criteria without any difficulty. These were (1) "References" before "See also", a breach of WP:LAYOUT; and (2) information in the lead but not in the body of the article (the date of the judo match), a breach of WP:LEAD. I have fixed both. I have no issues with the reassessment above. Bencherlite^Talk 12:20, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

I endorse the above, and thank you for the review. While I did flag this article in more than one place, I didn't feel it would be appropriate for me to delist this myself, however clear cut I considered the decision to be. —WFC— 12:25, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

I disagree with the delisting. The article simply meets the criteria; there are no more information about Aruba at the 2008 Summer Olympics, even not at the official website. --♫Greatorangepumpkin♫T 12:43, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

I'm finding several press sources easily on Google News quoting the Aruban IOC member. Searching by the athletes' names pulls up additional results, some of which are in Dutch. Just because the official website does not contain the information does not mean it does not exist at all. Sorry, but this article needs, and can have, more content to be worthy of the rating you bestowed. Imzadi 1979 → 12:53, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Ok, I added a section. Can you please give me the links for that?--♫Greatorangepumpkin♫T 13:09, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

And I removed it. Copyvios are not allowed. Bencherlite^Talk 13:11, 2 March 2011 (UTC)