Talk:Wojdan Shaherkani/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Sarastro1 (talk · contribs) 19:58, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

This looks pretty solid. I've made a few prose tweaks, which you may feel free to revert if you are not happy with them or I've messed anything up. Mainly minor issues to address which are concerned with prose or clarity. There are one or two other things which it may be worth adding for a more complete article, and while I would recommend doing so, I would not insist on it to pass this GA.

• There are several places which imply that the Games have not yet happened, such as "The Saudi Arabian Olympic Committee has imposed special rules", or "The Saudi Arabian Olympic Committee has chosen not to promote Shahrkhani's participation. They have also required that she "dress modestly, be accompanied by a male guardian and not mix with men" while in London for the 2012 Games", "The other Saudi woman selected is Pepperdine University-based runner Sarah Attar", "(who often speaks for her, partially because she does not know English)".
  • Think these are all fixed. --LauraHale (talk) 00:34, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

• Missed the last two; I did the first, but the second is marginal and would be OK kept as it is really. Sarastro1 (talk) 18:49, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

• Just checking: in UK English, in the lead, it should be "practised", and I'm not sure which variety we are using here.
  • Trying for UK English. (I'm from the USA and live in Australia. My UK English has moments of daily.) --LauraHale (talk) 00:34, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
• Judo is overlinked: linked in first two paragraphs.
• Fixed. --LauraHale (talk) 00:34, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
• Can we link blue belt and black belt?
  • No article exists for blue belt. It redirects to Black belt (martial arts). Added link to that in the article. --LauraHale (talk) 00:34, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
• "Shahrkhani was selected despite not meeting Olympic qualifying standards,[7] by specific invitation of the International Olympic Committee (IOC).[8]": Maybe better as "Although not meeting the Olympic qualifying standards, she was selected by specific [maybe "special" would work better] invitation of the International Olympic Committee (IOC)."
• What were the Olympic qualifying standards? I think it is worth spelling it out for the reader to get an idea of how far short she was of meeting them.
  • Fixed. --LauraHale (talk) 01:08, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
• "Unlike other judoka in competition, who have attained black belts in the sport, she had only acquired a blue belt": As the blue belt has already been mentioned, maybe this would be better as "Other judoka in the competition had attained black belts in the sport, in contrast to Shaherkani's blue belt:.
  • Fixed. --LauraHale (talk) 01:08, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

• Tweaked this a little as it didn't quite make sense. Sarastro1 (talk) 18:49, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

• "Shahrkhani's inclusion in the games came despite opposition inside Saudi Arabia to women representing the country at the Olympics.": A little clumsy; maybe just "There was opposite within Saudi Arabia to the concept of women representing the country at the Olympics".
  • Fixed. --LauraHale (talk) 01:08, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
• "Ultimately the Saudi government gave in to international pressure from sport and women's rights activists to include women or face possible sanctions.": How could the government face pressure from sport? Maybe sports governing bodies, or the sporting press?
• IOC or I.O.C.?

• There are still both instances in the article. Sarastro1 (talk) 18:49, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

• Ooops. Removed one of the I.O.C. references. The other is in a quote and cannot be changed. --LauraHale (talk) 00:50, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

• "She also stated that although she was not accustomed to fighting in such large tournaments": Not surprising if this was her first tournament! I think something needs clearing up there.
  • Fixed. --LauraHale (talk) 01:41, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

• Not really. It still carries this "quote", but says earlier in the article that it was her first competition. This is a contradiction, and maybe worth just cutting that section of the paraphrase. Also, the rather chatty nature of the "Still,..." does not quite work. Sarastro1 (talk) 18:49, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

* Poked User:Wrad to address as my Arabic is Google Translate. --LauraHale (talk) 01:04, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

• "She also stated that although she was not accustomed to fighting in such large tournaments, and the debate over the hijab had made it difficult to focus on the competition, she was happy to have participated, and planned to continue to practice judo in the future.": Long sentence, perhaps it could be split?
  • Fixed. --LauraHale (talk) 01:41, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
    • Changes didn't match up with what she actually said in Arabic. I will try to shorten the sentences with the original meaning in mind. Wrad (talk) 01:44, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
      • Ok, fixed. Wrad (talk) 01:49, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

• Not too sure that this is fixed: see above. Sarastro1 (talk) 18:49, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

* Poked User:Wrad for this. --LauraHale (talk) 01:05, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

• I don't see the problem, here. What is the contradiction, and how is "Still" chatty? Wrad (talk) 01:11, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

• Despite my confusion, I made some changes. Hopefully this helps. Wrad (talk) 01:21, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

• Maybe specify that the men's team faced expulsion if women had not been allowed to compete?
  • Sources I've checked appear to imply this but doesn't actually go that far. It makes me hesitant to want to include it. --LauraHale (talk) 01:41, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

• No problem. Sarastro1 (talk) 18:49, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

• Not essential for GA, but maybe a little more background in the article on women in Saudi sport? I think there is enough there to meet the GA criteria, but a little more information for context could only be a good thing.
  • This is one of those goofy things. There isn't much about her as a person in the article, and a lot of this is background on challenges to her competing (and to a larger degree, all sportwomen in Saudi Arabia). Hence there was a lot in Saudi Arabia women's national football team. I kind of feel like there is a rather large chunk already devoted to this topic in the article and adding more doesn't help. (And checking sources, I'm not seeing any additional information that isn't in this same theme of not about her, but about Saudi Arabian sportwomen in general.) Completely torn because I know at least once, this was stripped from the article as not being relevant, and the Saudi football team was nominated for deletion for similar reasons. --LauraHale (talk) 01:41, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

• Not a problem either way, I'll leave it up to you. Sarastro1 (talk) 18:49, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

• Possibly more could be added on the fight. She was obviously outclassed, but given that it only lasted 82 seconds, I would expect some mention of how the event unfolded in this article.

• Added more information. The official match results don't provide much of an idea of what happened, and no one really appears to have reported on the individual match. (And having been inside the judo hall during the Paralympics, I'm not that surprised.) --LauraHale (talk) 01:34, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

• There are actually videos of the match on youtube. You have to search for them in Arabic, though: [1] [2][3][4], etc. Wrad (talk) 02:40, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

• Spot-checks reveal no problems. One or two refs refer to things which might/are going to happen, while the article states that they did, but I think everything is fine.

• This should be fixed I think? --LauraHale (talk) 01:34, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

• Images, links and dablinks all check out.

I will place the article on hold to allow these issues to be addressed. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:28, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

Nearly there, just a couple of replies and a few comments left to address one way or another. Sarastro1 (talk) 18:49, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

OK, ready to pass now. Just a couple of points:

• I changed the 0:82 seconds back to 82 seconds as 0:82 seconds looks like it is less that one second (should it be 1:22 minutes?). Please revert if I am wrong.
• All other points now seem fine (although I haven't bothered to strike them, consider them struck!)
• Still not entirely convinced about the "such large tournament" thing (why not just "because she was not accustomed to fighting in such large tournaments" as she had never fought in ANY tournaments!), but that is not enough to hold this up any longer.
  • It's a direct quote from her. We need to stick with what she said. Wrad (talk) 15:54, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Passing now. An interesting read. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:09, 18 October 2012 (UTC)