Talk:Netherlands Antilles at the 2008 Summer Olympics/GA1

GA Review

edit

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

Reviewer: LauraHale (talk · contribs) 02:56, 27 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

Stating criteria for reference: A good article is—

  1. Well-written:
  2. (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.[1]
  3. Verifiable with no original research:
  4. (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);[2] and
    (c) it contains no original research.
  5. Broad in its coverage:
  6. (a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic;[3] and
    (b) it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
  7. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
  8. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
  9. [4]
  10. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
  11. [5]
    (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.[6]

Well written

edit
  •   I removed a citation out of the lead, put it in the body. (This move was imperfect. The text could be better integrated.) This now makes the lead summary style. --LauraHale (talk) 03:15, 27 November 2011 (UTC)Reply
  •   Appears to follow the manual of style, avoids weasel words, incorporates tables in a correct way, has few grammatical errors and no spelling errors that I noticed. Is it the best written text ever? No, but appears adequate for GA. I would improve before taking it further. A peer review may given an idea as how to improve. Wording in the article makes sense to me. --LauraHale (talk) 03:15, 27 November 2011 (UTC)Reply


Factually accurate and verifiable

edit

Broad in its coverage

edit

Neutral

edit

Stable

edit

Illustrated, if possible, by images

edit

I removed the pictograms. They don't work with screen readers. :/ If it could be confirmed that pictures were sought for this article and none were found, this section will be given a pass. --LauraHale (talk) 02:56, 27 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

The other two athletes and the NOC don't have available pictures, to my knowledge. I could add a picture of sprinter Churandy Martina, but it would be from his performance in games other than the 2008 Summer Olympics. Would that be appropriate? --Starstriker7(Talk) 04:02, 27 November 2011 (UTC)Reply
That would be a nice addition, even if it wasn't from the games. As he's one of the major competitors for the nation, it wouldn't seem completely out of place. Description could read something like "2008 Netherland Antilles Olympian NAME competing at UNRELATED EVENT." That way, it makes sense given the picture not being from the Games. :) --LauraHale (talk) 05:10, 27 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

Overall

edit

To pass, I would like confirmation of no images. I would also like to know if additional research has been done on the impact of the IOC decision for the nation in response to this being their last games. The latter isn't a requirement, but rather a nice to have as it would make the article more comprehensive. --LauraHale (talk) 03:15, 27 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

I've confirmed. As for the additional research, it doesn't seem to be a particularly big deal in the former Netherlands Antilles or in the IOC; I could only find one reference from the IOC, and nothing at all from local English and Papiamento papers. I think it will garner more attention in the coming 2012 London games. --Starstriker7(Talk) 04:22, 27 November 2011 (UTC)Reply
Not that surprised regarding the sources. :) Just wanted to confirm the research was done for the article, even if the results were "Nothing here." (I do Paralympians so have a great sympathy for "No information exists.") As we get closer, it might be worth remembering that and updating this article with some information… but for now, perfectly adequate. :) --LauraHale (talk) 05:12, 27 November 2011 (UTC)Reply
  1. ^ Compliance with other aspects of the Manual of Style, or the Manual of Style mainpage or subpages of the guides listed, is not required for good articles.
  2. ^ Either parenthetical references or footnotes can be used for in-line citations, but not both in the same article.
  3. ^ This requirement is significantly weaker than the "comprehensiveness" required of featured articles; it allows shorter articles, articles that do not cover every major fact or detail, and overviews of large topics.
  4. ^ Vandalism reversions, proposals to split or merge content, good faith improvements to the page (such as copy editing), and changes based on reviewers' suggestions do not apply. Nominations for articles that are unstable because of constructive editing should be placed on hold.
  5. ^ Other media, such as video and sound clips, are also covered by this criterion.
  6. ^ The presence of images is not, in itself, a requirement. However, if images (or other media) with acceptable copyright status are appropriate and readily available, then some such images should be provided.