Talk:Madagascar women's national football team/GA2

GA Reassessment

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

I will be reassessing this article to determine whether it still meets the Good Article criteria. Any user is encouraged to assist in improving the article to keep it up to GA standards. Thanks. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 21:03, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.	A few issues here, see below section.
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	Lists and sections are not supposed to be empty, of course, and there are many examples of this. The sections "Results and fixtures", "Coaching staff", and "Individual records" are all empty and orange-tagged as a result. There are two empty lists in the "Players" section. I am also not convinced of the need for results tables for tournaments such as the World Cup, Olympics, and African Games given Madagascar has never qualified for any of them. The lead section could also be expanded by a few more sentences at least.
2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.	From some quick checks, ref 3 does not give any information about Madagascar's team, and ref 4 does not work. Numerous fields in most references could be linked but are not.
	2b. 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).
	2c. it contains no original research.	No references are included in tournament history sections.
	2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.	Earwig gives 2.9%.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.
	3b. 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:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.	No images are included in the article.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
	7. Overall assessment.

Issues with criteria 1a

History

• "almost no country in the world" → "very few countries"
• "FIFA sanctioned" → link FIFA and put a hyphen here
• "single FIFA sanctioned match between 1950 and June 2012" → is 1950 chosen arbitrarily?
• "with ten teams agreeing to send teams including" → repetitive, perhaps replace the first "teams" with "countries" or "nations"
• "Madagascar did not record a result from this competition" → this line, in addition to "was supposed to host" makes it sound like an awkward way to say that the tournament was never held
• "FIFA recognised" → hyphen

Background and development

• "game at the time colonial powers brought football to the continent was limited as colonial powers in the region" → repetition
• First paragraph has limited specific application to Madagascar
• "Malagasy Football Federation was" → add "The" before sentence
• "In the nation's capital" → no reason not to name Antananarivo specifically here
• "adults players" → "adult players"
• "women only football clubs" → "women-only football clubs"
• "The other games were in the Indian Ocean Games" → unsourced

National youth teams

• Are there any other youth teams besides the u20s?
• "Madagascar women's national under-20 team were supposed" → "The Madagascar women's national under-20 team was supposed"
• Link the other teams mentioned here, like Senegal women's national football team and Reunion women's national football team

Players

• "The following players were named on xx xx 2022 for the xxx tournament" → never heard of that tournament

Competitive record

• COSAFA Women's Championship totals line is all wrong: 3+3+3 is not 6, 1+1 is not 0, 0+0+0 is not 1, 3+2+2 is not 5, 4+1+5 is not 4, 17+4+6 is not 47, and -13-3-1 is not -43.

See also

• No need to include "Women's football in Madagascar" here since it is not linked

Issues with 3b

The "Background and development section" isn't about the development of the women's national team. It is about women's football in Africa as a whole and then leans into women's football in Madagascar in general. This is a pattern across a lot of these women's national team articles. -Indy beetle (talk) 20:04, 2 July 2022 (UTC)

Overall review conclusion

WP:GAR states that An individual assessment may be closed after seven days of no activity. As there has been no activity on the review for seven days, I am closing the review. My conclusion is that the article fails GA criteria 1a, 1b, 2a, and 2c at least, and therefore will be delisted. If improvements are made in the future, and the article is brought up to par, it can be renominated for GA. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 21:38, 9 July 2022 (UTC)