Talk:Bahamas at the 2008 Summer Olympics/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Miyagawa (talk · contribs) 19:28, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

I'll be reviewing the article. I'm going to give it a read through now and add points below as they come up. Miyagawa (talk) 19:28, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

• There are currently fix disambiguation links that need to be fixed - click on the dablinks checker to the right of this to see them.
  • I have resolved all the ones listed on the dablinks checker. --Starstriker7^(Talk) 20:03, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
• There is a couple of different date formats used in the article - I note the one used in the lead is different to those in the citations, they need to be all the same format.
  • I apologize, I don't fully understand what you mean by this. Do you mean in the cite web template? I've noticed people replacing "date" with "year" and so forth on previous articles I have edited, but I never fully understood the purpose or difference. --Starstriker7^(Talk) 20:03, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
    • I mean in some places the dates are formatted say 1 January 2000, and in others January 1, 2000. You just need to pick a format and make sure all the dates in the article match it. Miyagawa (talk) 19:11, 28 June 2012 (UTC)
      • This should be all set. --Starstriker7^(Talk) 02:23, 30 June 2012 (UTC)
• Freeport News in cite #3 needs to be in italics as it's a print newspaper.
  • All set. --Starstriker7^(Talk) 20:03, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
• Could do with adding links for the athletes in the lead itself - it wouldn't be overlinking as the lead is kinda separate from the rest of the article.
  • Yeah, that was the reason why I didn't initially add those wikilinks. It seemed to turn out alright despite my concerns, though. --Starstriker7^(Talk) 20:03, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
• "Prior to Beijing, Bahamian athletes medaled gold in four events, silver in one, and bronze in four, numbering a total of nine medals." - unless you're trying to make some point about the variety of the events, its probably just better to say something along the lines of "Prior to Beijing, Bahamian athletes had won four gold medals, one silver and four bronze; a total of nine medals."
  • Sounds a lot better that way. I have replaced my wording with yours. --Starstriker7^(Talk) 20:03, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
• Is there a reason why Debbie Ferguson-McKenzie is listed as Debbie Ferguson in the lead, but with the double barrelled name in the article text?
  • Nope. --Starstriker7^(Talk) 20:03, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
• I think the medalists table needs to be a section on its own rather than a subsection of the background - it just doesn't feel like it's part of the background to the article. Also I think the key needs to be duplicated from further down the article directly below the table (and where it appears further down the article, moved to the other table its relevent to as at the moment its hidden in one of the women's athletics sections).
  • The medalist table has been separated, and I've added legends to each table. --Starstriker7^(Talk) 02:20, 30 June 2012 (UTC)
• Men's competition: Could do with links to the events mentioned - i.e. 100 meters to link to Athletics at the 2008 Summer Olympics – Men's 100 metres etc...
  • I added those. I also added headers in for events in sports with a multitude of athletes (also the women's athletics and the swimming sections). --Starstriker7^(Talk) 02:20, 30 June 2012 (UTC)
• I'm wondering what to suggest about the summary table currently in the Men's 4 x 400 meters relay section - I think that it would be better served in a new subsection simply entitled "Summary" as an overall table for the entire men's athletics shouldn't be sitting in the relay subsection. Same thing goes for the table in the women's long jump section, and with that note moved from the women's section to the men's as previously mentioned. Same thing about summary sections for the two swimming tables too.
  • Oakley added in headers for all tables, which I think was a good change. --Starstriker7^(Talk) 02:20, 30 June 2012 (UTC)
• All images are appropriate and all the references used are fine (with the exception of those formatting tweaks above).

Overall, very close to meeting the criteria. I've made a couple of small copy edits as it was just quicker to do them rather than nag you about them here as they were very minor, and one was simply to prevent you have from having two paragraphs after one another than ended in roughly the same sentence. I'll stick this on my watchlist and pop back for a further double check once you've had a chance to address these issues. Miyagawa (talk) 20:30, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

• Just noticed one little further thing as I was about to go do something else. The very first line of the lead reads "The Bahamas competed in the 2008 Summer Olympics, held in Beijing, People's Republic of China from August 8 to August 24, 2008." The actual country didn't compete, athletes from it did. Perhaps simply changing the first couple of words to read "Athletes representing the Bahamas..." That would also need the second line to change to "Their appearance marked the the fourteenth time the country had been represented at a Summer Olympics since it made its 1952 début in Helsinki." Oh, and that reminds me - could you link Helsinki through to the 1952 Summer Olympics too. Sorry! Miyagawa (talk) 20:38, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
  • Fixed, now okay, and fixed. I think this should be all ready to go. :) --Starstriker7^(Talk) 02:25, 30 June 2012 (UTC)
• Hi, thanks for reviewing this article! I haven't addressed everything at the moment, but this should be wrapped up soon enough. Let me know if anything comes up, or if I don't fully address any concerns. --Starstriker7^(Talk) 20:03, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

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):

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):

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):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

I fixed a couple more minor things that were quicker for me to do then delay this article's promotion to GA by posting them here. :) It's all set, nice job and a very informative and interesting article. Miyagawa (talk) 09:48, 30 June 2012 (UTC)