Talk:Goalkeeper (water polo)/GA1

GA Review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

The result was: listed.

---

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

Reviewer: LauraHale (talk · contribs) 06:43, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

Good article criteria

A good article is—

1. 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.

2. 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); and

(c) it contains no original research.

3. Broad in its coverage:

(a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic; and

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

4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:

(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.

Well-written:

(a) the prose is clear and concise, respects copyright laws, and the 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.[2]

"Goalkeepers should be wary of dummying." Dummying link offers no context and actually links to baulking. Is there a way to write this so it is more clear as to what dummying is and why goalkeepers should be way of it? --LauraHale (talk) 03:10, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Done 16:05, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Sculling in "This is achieved by sculling" links to something about rowing. If no correct page exists, please provide short description of it. --LauraHale (talk) 03:29, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Done Thanks for that - I don't think there is an article on the swimming version of sculling. Readers could have got very confused! 16:05, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

1880s does not need a wiki link. (Unless it was to something like 1880s in sport.) Ditto with 1940s. --LauraHale (talk) 03:29, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Done

Lead needs to be written in a more summary style. Can you find one key point from each section and create a paragraph out of that? --LauraHale (talk) 03:29, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Done - I couldn't find a sentence to summarise the history section - I hope that's OK.

What is a major foul in this context? --LauraHale (talk) 03:58, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Reworded for clarity. 16:05, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

"The goalkeeper can also be ejected for twenty seconds if a major foul is committed." I would reword to say "also be temporarily ejected from the game for twenty seconds" because in a game like baseball, if you're ejected, you don't come back. --LauraHale (talk) 03:58, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Done 16:05, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Factually accurate and verifiable:

Article is completely support by inline citations. --LauraHale (talk) 03:10, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Check of sources shows no reason to be concerned about plagiarism. Sources support the text. Nothing appears to by a synth of multiple sources to come up with original research. --LauraHale (talk) 03:54, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Broad in its coverage:

Are the major rule variants only FINA and the USA ones? Do the European club competitions use FINA rules? --LauraHale (talk) 03:24, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

The three most major governing bodies are by far FINA, NCAA and NFHS. I think that I heard somewhere that European water polo doesn't have its own set of rules, but I could be wrong about that. Also, I couldn't find anything online saying either way, so I'm not sure it's notable. JZCL 16:23, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

If you could check one more time for me and confirm you looked and nothing there to add (or add if you do find something), will pass. --LauraHale (talk) 04:51, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

[1] at section 4.2.4 states The goalkeeper shall wear a red cap numbered 1 and the substitute goalkeeper shall wear a red cap numbered 13. A player shall not be allowed to change his cap number during the final stage of the Championship. This is the only thing I could find. It is more about the structure than the rules of the game - I think it's pretty much the same as FINA and is so minor I don't think it's worth mentioning it. [2] didn't seem to have anything either. Thanks for all your hard work here. JZCL 15:17, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

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

Article is neutral enough. --LauraHale (talk) 03:40, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

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

Article is stable and not subjected to any ongoing edit wars. --LauraHale (talk) 03:10, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Illustrated, if possible, by images:

All images have appropriate copyright tags. They do illustrate points in the article, such as giving an idea of the history of what goalkeepers look like, what hats they wear and moves by goalkeepers. The captions support this type of inclusion. --LauraHale (talk) 03:15, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Passing

Satisfied it meets criteria. --LauraHale (talk) 04:17, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.