Talk:Netball in the Cook Islands/GA2

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Racepacket (talk) 03:15, 18 March 2011 (UTC) GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

---

Thank you for nominating this article. No invalid or disamb. external links.

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose quality:

   What is a "registered player"?

   This is a field that is put in the info boxes on most sport articles. It means players who are officially counted by the organising body for the sport. In the case of the Cook Islands, it would be the number of players who are registered with the Cook Islands Netball Association. --LauraHale (talk) 21:12, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

   Please state it in the article. 22:08, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

   Can you please make the edit to that? I'm unsure how to edit that information in. --LauraHale (talk) 22:23, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

   Just add "with the Cook Islands Netball Association"

   Hawkeye7 fixed. --LauraHale (talk) 03:22, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

   "important national festivals like the Manea Games.[14]" - delete "important"

   Fixed. --LauraHale (talk) 21:12, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

   "The game has also been embraced by men." - too judgmental and not supported by the sources which say that there is prejudice against men playing the game.

   Changed the wording to say the game is being played by some men. --LauraHale (talk) 21:12, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

   This sentence does not belong in the lead paragraph: "There have been several people have been important in terms of helping to develop the game in the Cook Islands and to raise the profile of the country internationally. They include Anna Noovao, Margharet Matenga, Mamia,[16] Tina Pupuke Browne,[17] and Elizabeth Tou.[18]"

   Sentence removed.

   "The most developed and popular of them is netball, a sport at which the Cook Islands has excelled on a global stage." - judgmental and puffing.

   Changed excelled to participated in. Popular appears accurate to me as it has the highest rate of female participation of any sport in the Cook Islands and there has been a great deal of money spent to develop the game, including bringing in coaches and improving facilities. --LauraHale (talk) 21:12, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

   "The two most important international sport competitions that the islands compete in are the Commonwealth Games and the South Pacific Games." - unclear whether this is speaking of all sports or just netball. Reword "compete in" -> in which the islands compete?

   Changed to Cook Islands participate in. --LauraHale (talk) 21:12, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

   No, "in which the Cook Islands participate" - if you must use the word "in" then give the preposition an object.

   Yes. The article is written in New Zealand English. That usage is acceptable in New Zealand English. Your arguement may be correct for American English, but it is not the case with New Zealand English. --LauraHale (talk) 07:36, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

   "During the period in the 1970s when the Cook Islands started its effort to host international sporting events,[19] the popularity of netball grew.[4]" are you trying to imply cause and effect?

   Changed to avoid that implication. Not intention and have not read sources that suggest that. --LauraHale (talk) 21:36, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

   "New Zealand worked hard to develop the sport in the Cook Island during the 1980s, when they hosted a number of coaching and umpiring clinics.[4]" - need a different subject in this sentence. Perhaps the New Zealand Netball Association? Be specific as to who performed these actions.

   Sources aren't specific. Source just says New Zealand. --LauraHale (talk) 21:36, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

   How about New Zealand athletic organizations....

   organisations. This is New Zealand English, not American. Beyond that, the article does not imply only New Zealand sport organisations. There is a strong possibility that the New Zealand government could have helped fund it, as the New Zealand government actively funds sports in Oceania. Australia is the same. These two governments support sport in their countries and elsewhere as part a general campaign to develop the region, improve the economy and improve quality of life. Thus, leaving it at New Zealand with all the implications of that is best in terms of accuracy and in terms of reflecting the source. --LauraHale (talk) 07:42, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

   In our conversations on the talk page, I will allow you to use spellings that you understand and will not nitpic you and I suggest that you allow me the same privilege. The goal is to improve the article. Can we find a second source that is less ambiguous? Otherwise consider quoting the source. Racepacket (talk) 10:39, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

   If you're suggesting improvements for wording changes, suggesting wording changes that do not comply with the article's language hardly feels like a nitpick... especially when you're nitpicking grammatical errors in the article elsewhere that are not problems in New Zealand English. That issue aside, it makes sense with the ambiguity. The section involving a quote would be rather long. The summary provided in the text is much more concise. This could be one of those issues where you've got a case of American bias, in that you think that sport funding is handled through national federations that are largely dependent on sponsorship dollars. I don't quite see the problem here in just saying New Zealand. In a lot of cases, people say America does stuff with out directly saying the people, organisations or government involved. --LauraHale (talk) 10:55, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

   The sentences supported by Ref 21 are limited to the 1988-1992 time period covered by that report. But the sentences are in the present tense. How do we know that this is true 9 years later?

   Changed the wording to try to reflect that. --LauraHale (talk) 21:36, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

   "Netball was not recognised as an Olympic sport until 1995.[22][23]" Shouldn't this be "Netball is recognized in 1995 by the International Olympic Committee, but unlike women's basketball, it is not included in the Summer Olympic Games." - as written you imply that it is an Olympic sport i.e., played in the Olympics.

   Article uses New Zealand English so recognised is the correct form. Basketball is not relevant and was not mentioned in the sources. It would also be confusing because it assumes familiarity with women's basketball at the Olympics. (Basketball is not that big in parts of the world primarily interested in netball.) I skimmed several other article about sports recognised but not played in the Olympics. They do not say play. My assumption would be that if the game was Olympic recognised and Olympic played, the next sentence would talk about the Cook Islands at the Olympics. --LauraHale (talk) 21:36, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

   You may not use the term "Olympic sport" to describe Netball. I suggest my wording avoids this confusion.

   It is an Olympic recognised sport. Just because it is recognised sport does not mean it is played in the Olympics. And women's basketball absolutely can't be used either, unless the intent is to refer to netball using the sport's alternative name. The sport is an Olympic recognised sport. It just is not played at the Olympics games. Because it is an Olympic recognised sport, the sport gets additional funding. --LauraHale (talk) 03:22, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

   • The article Olympic sport says: Many sports are not included in the Olympic program but are recognised by the IOC. At any time, a recognised sport may be added to the Olympic program This article includes a list of recognised sports. Hawkeye7 (talk) 03:40, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

   It appears that we are in agreement. You may say, "In 1995 the International Olympic Committee recognized netball." You cannot say, "Netball is an Olympic sport." The article Olympic sport is consistent, noting, "The Olympic sports comprise all the sports contested in the Summer and Winter Olympic Games." Since netball does not meet that definition, it is false to say that netball is an "Olympic sport". The article must be corrected. The IOC recognized netball as a sport. Recognition as a sport does not mean that it was or will be played in the Olympics. If the IOC had designated netball as an Olympic sport, it would be played in future Olympics. Please be clear by using the IOC as the subject of your sentence and netball as the object of the verb. Please avoid the misleading phrase "Olympic recognized sport." Further, I believe that many people view women's basketball and netball as two variations of the same game. In the IOC adopting women's basketball as an Olympic sport, the prospects for netball becoming an Olympic sport was greatly diminished. I see this as relevant to this article. Racepacket (talk) 01:22, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

   :Fixed: It appears we are in agreement. The wording is acceptable as it stands and does not need to be changed because netball is an Olympic sport: "Many sports are not included in the Olympic program but are recognized by the IOC." Good to know that we can move on. --07:44, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

   Current wording is too confusing to the reader. Please read above paragraph. Please use the IOC as the subject of the sentence and netball as the object of the verb. Racepacket (talk) 10:08, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

   Current wording is not confusing to the reader. Current information is clear. You're stuck on the American definition of Olympic sport meaning played in the Olympics. It just isn't defined that way and the article you linked to makes it clear that a sport can be an Olympic one with out being contested in the Olympics. Added to that, the paragraph goes on to explain the issues of money. The paragraph does not imply in any way that netball has been played in the Olympics. This has been explained to you on Talk:Netball/GA1 and rehashing it here isn't going to change that any. The usage is correct based on the article. It is understood in context. The use of Olympic sport fits with New Zealand English. These three things are why the change you're suggesting does not make sense. It again smacks of American bias. (The sport is not American. The article is not about an American colony. They don't speak American English. Stop treating it like that. This inability to recognise these three things is getting annoying. If you're not familiar with New Zealand English, ask for a second reviewer who is.) --LauraHale (talk) 11:01, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

   Reword run on sentence: "A member of the Oceania Netball Federation, the Cook Islands' participation in the international netball community raised the islands' profile globally." - I don't know what a "profile" is or how you can measure whether it was raised.

   Changed profile to visibility. Made sentence into two sentences. --LauraHale (talk) 21:36, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

   How about, "The Cook Islands participate in international competitions as a member of the [[Oceania Netball Federation]]."? Racepacket (talk) 01:22, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

   What is wrong with "The Cook Islands participate in international competitions as a member of the Oceania Netball Federation." ? And they don't compete in the Oceania Netball Federation. They only compete there for regional competitions or where they have to qualify for events like the Netball World Championships coming out of a region. Your alternative suggestion changes the meaning. The original fix should be fine as it is accurate and reflects the source. --LauraHale (talk) 07:52, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

   Perhaps you misunderstand my recommendation. I am proposing that the original run-on sentence (which is now two sentences) be replaced with "The Cook Islands participate in international competitions as a member of the [[Oceania Netball Federation]]." The remainder "The nation's participation in the international netball community has raised the islands' visibility globally.[17][39][7] " is not adequately supported by its proposed sources and may be WP:SYN If you want to include the idea in the article, please quote directly from a source and not attribute the opinion to Wikipedia. See WP:QUOTE. Racepacket (talk) 10:39, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

   Perhaps you misunderstand me. "The Cook Islands participate in international competitions as a member of the [[Oceania Netball Federation]]." That statement is not accurate. It cannot be included because it is not accurate. I do not understand why you want to insert an inaccurate sentence into the article. In Association Football, the USA is a member of Concacaf. In World Cup soccer for men and women, the United States does not participate as a member of Concacaf. It participates as a member of FIFA. It gets to the World Cup by qualifying through the Concacaf tournament. It does not have to compete in many other tournaments as a member of Concacaf. A similar situation exists for the Cook Islands in terms of netball. You can't say they compete as a member of that organisation. You can say they are a member of the organisation. That is accurate but your wording goes beyond member to something else. The Oceania organisation does not have representative sides that compete like all star teams against other federations, with the Cook Islands side being so good that their whole team competes in such a competition. --LauraHale (talk) 11:13, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

   Are not all members of the Oceania Netball Federation also members of the IFNA? Your argument does not follow. "As a member" is one way to say "in the context of being a member" Racepacket (talk) 16:43, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

   Beyond that, the sources do support the statement. International ranking alone gives it visibility and increases its international profile. Small nations specialise in sports specifically to become good at one or two sports so that they can get visibility on the world stage. If they don't do the grass roots development themselves, the poach players from other countries. Why else would a country like Georgia give citizenship to Brazilian Beach Volleyball players? The rankings alone support this argument regarding visibility because look! THE COUNTRY IS VISIBLE! It has one of the best netball teams in the world. --LauraHale (talk) 11:13, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

   The sources do not address "visibility." Cook Island is ranked 11th out of 25. Racepacket (talk) 16:43, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

   What do you mean by this notation, "NZ$20,000 ($NaN in 2011)"?

   Whoops. The template works for American dollars. It was supposed to show that $20,000 in NZD in 1986 was worth in current NZD dollars. Removed the last part as template does not function right. --LauraHale (talk) 21:36, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

   "In the lead up to the World Youth Championship," - state year.

   Done. --LauraHale (talk) 21:36, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

   "During that period, the government sought" - state what period

   Clarified. --LauraHale (talk) 21:36, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

   In the "People" section, the sentence "Many people have been important in the push develop the game in the Cook Islands and raise the profile of the country internationally." has two problems - words are missing and "raise the profile" is meaningless.

   Fixed the wording. --LauraHale (talk) 21:36, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

   Does "Mamia" have a full name?

   No. --LauraHale (talk) 21:36, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

   Define "Silver Ferns" for the reader.

   Still unaddressed.

   B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:

   Lead should be a fair summary of the article.

   Lead fixed. --LauraHale (talk) 03:49, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. References to sources:

   In lead, "The Cook Islands are a major netball playing country in Oceania," - not clear what the reference supports. Yes, the Cook Islands is in Oceania, but no support for "major netball playing nation."

   Still a problem - fn 1 and 2 do not support this. At the very most fn 2 can spport, "The IFNA ranks the Cook Islands 11th out of 25 nations." Racepacket (talk) 05:03, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

   Ranking 11 in the world supports that statement. If you rank in the top 25, you are an important netball nation. This is no different than the world cup for association soccer: If you qualify, you're a major player in the sport. --LauraHale (talk) 07:54, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

   "Unlike some countries, the growth of men's netball" do you have a ref as to which countries?

   B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

   Ref. 8 reads like an opinion column rather than a news story.

   Not sure what ref8 is now, with subsequent edits. What text does it refer to that the citation is problematic? --LauraHale (talk) 03:57, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

   "Samoa Observer (28 February 2011). "A journey of a thousand miles begins for Samoa national men’s netball team". Samoa Observer. Retrieved 2 March 2011." - is this a reliable source or an opinion piece?

   Yes, it is a reliable source. It is a newspaper and it is reporting on Samoa's national men's netball team. (And the journey of a thousand miles seems apt. Do you know where Samoa is located and its relative distance to these countries it competes with? Or the funding issues that men's netball teams have to deal with compared to their female counter parts? Netball may be an Olympic recognised sport, but Olympic recognition does not include men as I don't believe they recognised two governing organisations for the sport.) That sort of language is often found in sport related articles. The Samoa Observer is the major newspaper in the region.--LauraHale (talk) 08:29, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

   Also, have you read the rest of the article? If you read the whole article, it is very obvious that the WHOLE PIECE is not a column. That you ask this question and imply that makes it appear as if you have not read the WHOLE ARTICLE. --LauraHale (talk) 08:36, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

   The question is whether the article you selected as a source was a news story or an opinion piece. Sentences such as "So, to the business community reading this, give kindly, and support the National Men’s side with their efforts." shake my confidence. Also, I always thought that the Cook Islands and Samoa were separate islands. I read the article as discussing Samoa rather than the Cook Islands. It discussed that the Cook Islands provided a venue in 2009 for an international tournament, but did not say whether there were one or more teams from the Cook Islands. Did I misunderstand? Racepacket (talk) 10:39, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

   The article is a news piece. It is from a reliable source. The contest is being held in the Cook Islands. I've added additional citations around the men to clear this up. --LauraHale (talk) 11:30, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

   Footnote 50 is floating off by itself. What does it support?

   Has been renumbered as fn 47 and it is still floating.

   Just floating. Removed now. --LauraHale (talk) 03:53, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

   There are several citations numbered 47. Which particular 47 is floating? Every 47 that I see is connected to a specific citation. Which section is this floating 47 floating in? --LauraHale (talk) 08:36, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

   "She represented the country at Pacific Games, Commonwealth Games and the World Championships.[18]" - she played on the national team in... (otherwise, the reader will think that she coached the national team in....)

   fn 22: "Huffer & 2006 p23" is broken. Also p. 23 of that reference says "In sports, women occupy executive positions in national and local sporting bodies, particularly in netball." but the article says "historically, the sport has been administered by women." One says that some executives are women but the article implies more. Perhaps you meant "historically, women participated in the administration of the sport."

   C. No original research:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   How is netball funded?

   Any statistics on overall participation levels or spectator attendance?

   Nation's population is around 27,000. Participation is at 1,000 registered players. No information about spectatorship. The sources suggest this is a participation game in the Cook Islands, not a spectator one. --LauraHale (talk) 22:25, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

   Don't just tell me, put it in the article, "Out of the 27,000 residents of the Cook Island, 1,000 have registered with the Oceania Netball Federation as netball players."

   The participation rates are there: 1,000 people are registered players. That should give an idea as to the participation rates. The sentence you suggested does not fit in to the lead as it isn't supported in the body and the writing in the body doesn't support it. Beyond that, if you click on the Cook Islands, you can see the total population. If you feel this is vitally important, can you suggest a better wording that does not involve rewriting the whole paragraph? Can this be inserted as a footnote? --LauraHale (talk) 08:00, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

   B. Focused:

4. Is it neutral?

   Fair representation without bias:

   "Netball has a lot of grass roots support and an important part of life for many women on the islands." is judgmental and POV pushing. How do we measure "many" and "a lot"?

“ There's strong grassroots in Samoa, Vanuatu, Tonga, Niu and the Colomon and Cook Islands ”

1. Removed many and lot to get rid of weasel words. Double checked sources to make sure they were the right ones and that they said what the citations implied. --LauraHale (talk) 22:05, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

   Just because a source says something does allow us to repeat it in the voice of Wikipedia. Consider using quotations when dealing with argumentative or counter-intuitive items. Racepacket (talk) 10:45, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

2. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

   No edit wars.

3. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

   A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

   B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:

   I agree with the prior GA review that pictures of players or the stadium would be helpful, but not required for GA.

4. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

   This article represents significant work by its author, but is far from GA standards. Putting review on hold for you to address concerns. Racepacket (talk) 03:58, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for your changes. Please see my comments above. Racepacket (talk) 22:08, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Made changes for the most recent comments above where applicable. Explained where changes were not made. --LauraHale (talk) 08:30, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

I have reviewed your comments and in some cases, they do not match the changes you did or did not make the in article itself. Please see my comments. I will give you one last opportunity to fix the problems. Thanks, Racepacket (talk) 10:39, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

I have given the nominator every opportunity to bring this article up to GA standards. There are POV problems burried in prose that lacks clarity. When I point out the ambiguities, rather than making the prose clear, the nominator responds that it is self-evident assuming that the readers shares the nominator's preconceptions. Terms of art such as "Olympic sport" have specific meanings which the nominator acknowleges, yet the terms continue to be misused. ("Netball was not recognised as an Olympic sport until 1995.[19][20]") I do not have a monopoly on the truth and I defer to the nominator in cases where expertise is involved. However, the GA criteria are clear and they are not met by this article. The article requires a careful re-write to remove POV and to add clarity. Sorry it did not work out. Racepacket (talk) 16:33, 20 March 2011 (UTC)